1971 in 2000

I too, would like to see substantiation that Indira Gandhi made a statement about taking revenge for thousand years of subjugation in reference to the 1971 war in Parliament or even in a speech elsewhere.

The reason that I find it incredible is that it is quite out of political character. I can imagine certain BJP-ites possibly saying such things; but not Mrs. Gandhi. She was too smart a politician to say anything so dumb.

-Arun Gupta

If we take Mahmud of Ghazni to 1857, it still doesn`t make a thousand years.

A few centuries before Ghazni, Muhammad bin Qasim did arrive, but didn`t get further than Sindh.

Some basic arithmetic is a useful skill.

-arun gupta

Re: Truth

Boy, you are getting too touchy. Let`s not get into a competition of finger pointing.

``With regard to Indira Gandhis statement, if made, it was unfortunate. I would like to see an authoritative reference to the statement made in Parliament.``

Don`t you guys have access to parliament proceedings. If not how about looking at archived newspapers of that time.

``Even if we she did make it, one swallow does not a summer make. The extent of bias in Indian leaders is high relative to a standard which assumes perfect lack of bias -``

Why talk in relative terms. Poor, substandard remains exactly that.

``it is much lower than leadership in Pakistan which cannot take on separate electorates, blasphemy prosecution by accusation, state religion, lack of ability to take on bigots in Madrassas, naming of missiles as Ghauri & Ghaznavi etc. etc. . As a result, please dont lecture on the ``mentality of your leaders``.``

Never had a good word for any of the Pakistani leaders (Jinnah excluded). Agree on the Ghauri/Ghazanavi part. I would have preferred Ashoka. Would have been more appropriate. I believe this brave son of Punjab was the first one to invade the Gangetic valley and establish permanent rule at Patliputra (Patna?). Where have the days of Sapta-Sindhu gone?

``Its not great but it operates in a framework which is light years ahead of Pakistani or Bangladeshi leadership,``

Light years ahead, eh? OK! If you say so :-)

(what`s the % of non-Brahmin MPs in your parliament?)

``including Musharraf, who like a coward, hides behind jihad, itself a violation of Islam.``

To soon to make any judgement on Musharraf. Can`t call him a coward, though.

``Anyway, welcome back!``

Thanks, ol` chap :-).

If I recall, one person who talked of a 1000-year something was YLH`s idol who promised a 1000 year war or something that trite.

Historical objects are fine as a benchmark, but when you start fantasizing about those accomplishments hundreds of years ago, another thing happens, your mindset also slips back to that era--something unfortunately is happening wholesale over there

I am glad the Hamood-ur-Rahman report was finally published. I wish it would have been published years ago. It is interesting to note the reactions of various groups of people, both inside and outside Pakistan, to the contents of this report. Instead of sharing the blame, the politicians, army and the general populace of Pakistan are busy blaming each other. Another interesting reaction is from the Indian contributors. Many of the same people who are the primary cheerleaders for India`s offensives against innocent civilians, are on the forefront of criticizing Pakistan`s actions in East Pakistan. In the later case, while much of the criticism is legitimate, it is also hypocritical.

The events in 1971 were definitely a tragedy. It is unfortunate that the human rights situation in the Sub-Continent has still not reached the level of maturity and civility that can allow various groups of people to live their lives the way they prefer. Not the way someone else prefers. What makes it even more tragic is the fact that many of the groups of people committing the atrocities have a history of themselves being victims of similar atrocities.

In any kind of suppression and subjugation, the only group that is in the right is the one that is pursuing its right of self-determination. Self-determination is a God-given right of every community on earth; regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, naitonality etc. In brief, if the East Pakistanis, as a group of people, felt exploited and wanted to separate from Pakistan, they should have been allowed to do so in a peaceful manner, through some sort of a vote. It would have saved a lot of East and West Pakistani lives, and the end result would have been the same, i.e. an independent Bangladesh. No group of human beings has or had a right to tell another group of humans how and under whom the later should spend their lives. Case closed, end of discussion.

The respect of human life is what separates the civilized societies of the world (like Canada) from the uncivilized societies of the world (like Pakistan and India). Luckily, Pakistan has at least reached the level of maturity where a majority of Pakistanis are now willing to accept the fact that West Pakistan was at fault in 1971. Hopefully, Pakistanis have accepted the existence of Bangladesh, and have recognized their struggles for self-determination as a legitimate struggle. All of this is evident from the comments of the various Pakistanis on this site. In this sense, in my opinion, Pakistanis have progressed beyond India; Indians still being unable to accept the concept of self-determination of individuals.

It takes a lot of courage to accept ones own faults, both personal and national. However self-criticism, and acceptance of legitimate criticism from external sources on human rights issues, is a sign of a healthy society; not a weak society. Accepting the fact that West Pakistan, and not East Pakistan, was at fault in 1971 is quite an achievement. It would have been much better had this been achieved in 1971. A lot of the bloodshed would have been avoided. But, better late than never.

So West Pakistan was the guilty party. The question now is to find out which group within West Pakistan deserves the blame. Usually in any scenario in which the military is deployed to suppress another group`s legitimate rights (East Pakistan, Vietnam, Kashmir, Bosnia, etc.), it is the miltary which ends up in hot water, once the dust settles. This is a convenient way for the civilian population and politicians to portray themselves as an innocent party. However, no military can enter a conflict if it is not ordered to do so by the political or executive leadership of the country it represents. And no national leader will ever order a military into action against a minority, if the general population of the country does not openly or subtly support the military action; this is specially true in democracies, but also holds true in dictatorships.

The responsibility of the East Pakistan tragedy falls on the shoulders of the opportunistic politicians of East and West Pakistan, the Pakistan military (specially the military leadership), and the general population of Pakistan (it also falls on the Indian govt. which acted as a catalyst with the sole intention of splitting up Pakistan, and not out of any sympathy for the East Pakistanis; but that is a separate debate). The Mukti Bahni should also be blamed for its killing of the, ``non-Bangladeshi`` civilians.

The Pakistan military obviously deserves the blame, since they were the ones actually carrying out the suppression. However, as I have stated in regards to the killings of innocent civilians by other militaries, the civilian population which supports the military actions (or supports the leadership ordering the actions) is part and parcel of the killings. It is quite unfortunate to see the Pakistani johnny-come-lately peace lovers try to put the blame on everyone else, except themselves. What were they doing in 1971? Did they have the courage to take a stand against the actions of the Pakistan govt.?

The true sign of a humanitarian is not someone who tries to place the blame for human rights violations, on everyone else, except him/herself. The true humanatarian is the one who attempts, in his/her own way, to stop the violations when they are occuring. Perhaps, someday South Asian countries will reach the later stage. If Paksitan can accept its own faults in 1971, it will be well on its way.

I seem to have stirred quite a hornet`s nest here.The children of secularism are tripping all over themselves demanding solid proof of the indiscretions of Durga.Unlike rjanjua I don`t have the slightest clue exactly where and on what occasion Indira actually uttered those infamous words except that they have passed into the popular lexicon of Pakistani attitudes toward India.I find it highly amusing though that they are considered a concoction of the rabid ``doctored`` Pakistani mind.Is it possible that the ``secular`` establishment in India devised an elaborate coverup to get rid of this nonsensical statement? I guess not. Too much Ludlum can do strange things to ones reasoning ability!!

Just like the sight of a woman in jeans in Pakistan causes the Mullah to lose his marbles and declare `Islam is in danger` never mind his friends happily killing adherents of the opposite sect the proud proponents of secularism go red in the face when told of some off-the-cuff remark by their erstwhile leader never mind the killing of christian nuns and priests and burning of their places of worship.Symbolism over substance. So what`s new?

My point in the post was to point out the obvious. There was a WAR in 1971 and there was an external enemy too. 93000 men did not surrender to Hanuman. And yes there were terrible atrocities. But can anyone name one war that was fought according to the Geneva convention(whatever that is)? Name one uprising even now(Ireland,Basque,Mindinao and yes Kashmir) where the state apparatus is not being used to crush the ``insurgents``?Wasn`t the golden temple desecrated? Didn`t the Pakistani army crush the BNM supporters in the 70s or the MQM in the 80s? Haven`t those movements died out? I wonder how many accounts of pain and suffering we would have gotten to read had there been a Khalistan and an independent Baluchistan.Tendering apologies will not do away with war.

later

-sac

P.S:Satyavadi:Thanks for not ruling out the possibility that Indira might have uttered those words.The rest of the brigade unfortunately will be much less magnanimous.

indira gandhi`s remark after 1971 was - `we have finally buried the two-nation theory in the bay of bengal`.

there is no reference to `1000 years of subjugation by muslims`.

The crimes of 1971 are still not over because
the ``Biharis`` or Stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh
are still paying the price for being patriotic at the wrong place and at the wrong time.

Another interesting article in Dawn today:

http://www.dawn.com/2000/08/24/op.htm

Ras

Is this guy Jaffar Ullah Pakistani? If so, its especially sad to read the way he writes about Gul Hassan Khan. Probably heard the name somewhere, added an Osmani, a sprinkling of Yahya and the usual nonsensical fauji-bashing starts.

Lt. Gen. Gul Hassan Khan, a thorough gentleman and a professional soldier passed away last year. At the time of his death, apart from his clothes the only thing he owned of value was his wrist watch which he willed to his orderly. He would be remembered for masterminding the brilliant advance on Akhnour(sp?) when he was Chief of the General Staff. May his soul rest in peace. Ameen.

I am from Bangladesh and I live in Houston. I host a discussion group about the 1971 Genocide at www.egroups.com/group/The1971Genocide. Some of our members are from Pakistan.

I am impressed with the depth of the article written by Salman Akhtar. However, I believe many in Pakistan have difficulty with the number ``3 million`` for the number massacred.

Bangladesh, at the time had a population of 75 million. 3 million would come to 1 in every 25, -which, me and many that had made reasonable estimates - find it reasonably accurate.

We lived in Dhanmandi a better part of Dhaka city. Our household had 6 members my neighbors were 8. Our neighbor’s son was a Captain in the Paki Army, and made no efforts to escape, yet he was beaten to death and the family did not even get the body. Another house down, a family was picked up one night during curfew and was never seen again. There were at least 9 members including some relatives. As you can see out of 21 people, plus about 5 servants, in three houses side by side in Dhanmandi, lost 10 people. Therefore an average of 1 out of 25 is very reasonable and that would make it 3 million.

As far as the retaliation that took place on the Biharis and other Non-Bangalis - it is deeply regrettable and my prayers to them who lost their loved ones. There is no excuse for it. Although, I have to say, many including our family did not hesitate to risk our lives to rescue and save many.

But, as Salman pointed out these were disorganized Mobs that went out of control and quite far from an organized ``Military killing machine`` gunning down its unarmed citizens.

There is also much talk about who created Bangladesh, or it would not have had happened if it was not for India or the Awami League. Hogwash! Bangladesh was a product of Military rule or more loudly the lack of Democratic rule. This problem faces Pakistan, still today.

Pakistan`s biggest enemy is the poor choices its people makes and continues to make by accepting Military rule. Tolerance and respect between the people of its different provinces and the growth of a Middle Class will also help them in their march towards a sustainable democracy.

McGupta #51

Bhai Likhney se pehley Parh Lia Karo. Baten mut c---- ziada.

Mohammed bin Qasim at the time of Hajjaj bin Yusuf attacked Sind in 700`s that makes already 1200+ years. Akbar was ruling in 1500`s that makes more than 400+ years.

Umairr #55, ``The true sign of a humanitarian is not someone who tries to place the blame for human rights violations, on everyone else, except him/herself. The true humanatarian is the one who attempts, in his/her own way, to stop the violations when they are occuring.``

This and the rest of your post is truly a gem.

I don`t think anyone could have said it better and in a more objective manner.

Re: satyavadi

``Whether Indira said that or not, the fact is that its not the Indian (or Pakistani) Muslims who ruled India, when it was ruled by all the Muslim dynasties. So the Indian (Indian in the ethnic sense) Muslims including your ancestors were RULED, much like the Hindus and other communities of India. ``

Not only were their ancestors also ruled, many of their ancestors were also Hindu!! Forced conversions were as common as Musharraf`s proclamations of terrorists as freedom fighters.

Few comments.

First of all as the article suggests, and is well known, except by pseudointellectuals the reasons of alienation of East Pakistan is well known.

Compared to Fazlul-Haque, Sheikh Mujib was a very active Muslim League (I think student leader) worker in East Pakistan. As enough reasons are already given, I would like to know, the concentration of West Pakistani Capital like Adamjee, Dawood, Saigol etc in East Pakistan, because it will put East Pakistanis in double jeopardy. One political and economic subjugation by West Pakistan and second even in matter of investment in Bengal giving preference to West Pakistani Industrialists. In jute mills I think Adamjee was top. There is no mention in the article from this point.

I think Mujeeb was sane enough to propose six points, which is confederation basically. I don`t think a Federation with numerical superiority of East Pakistan and Power concentration in West Pakistan was viable. But the option of confederation would not be in the benefit of West Pakistan. So the West Pakistani plan with Bhutto as representative of West Pakistan for a Coalition Government. Given the past history of West Pakistani leaders regarding Jugto Front etc and rule by West Pakistan on East Pakistan even at the time of first democracy, this option would be seen by Mujib as buying time by West Pakistan ultimately to dissolve assembly and put direct rule of West Pakistan. With the Iron hot at that time, Mujib would not fall into this trap.

Politicians not only realized that but were acting according to it. One was a seasoned politician, Sheikh Mujib and other was a good student of history, Bhutto.

Not only West Pakistan is to blame, but also once everything was realized, why massacre and at such a large scale, or was our army hiding their head in sand too BRAVE):.That was an unnecessary step and heinous crime in parting of ways. Bhutto is as guilty, as my aunt, who told us ``see Tikka Khan`` will make ``Tikka Boti`` of Bengalis, as our great Danishwar Altaf Hasan Qureshi writing at the height of Massacre ``Mohabbat Ka Zamzam Beh Raha Hai`` as Jamat-e-Islami not only claiming that drunkard, womanizer ``Yahya Khan`` as ``Mard-e-Momin, ``Mard-e-Haque`` (Zia was titled later with the same), but by forming Al-Badr and Al-Shams to support army in the massacre.

On another note, even if Indira Gandhi said something or left it untold, does it make any difference. If she said she only expressed the apathy, ineptitude and callousness of us as a nation. And if she did not, she was polite. It was not her fault that she spoke. It was our fault the way we acted. I think she was kind enough to allow 93,000 POW back to Pakistan, return the areas captured on Western front (who said there was no fight on Western front, Sulemanki etc did not migrate to West Pakistan but were there at that time also), and agreeing to settle all disputes with bilateral agreement. In fact she was so magmamanious that Simla agreement was considered a victory of Bhutto.

Right is right whether done by me or other and so is wrong. Wrong done by my brother does not make it right.

Pakistani people in West Pakistan are still fighting the same war, in many forms. And the rule of Beureaucracy-Army-Industrialist cum Feudal alliance (with their pet dog aka J.I.) is stii there intact.

And who said Bhutto was not afraid of this alliance. One of the reason of Nationalization to me was breaking the power of notorious Industrialists. Many Generals sacked in army and a ``Majhool General`` Zia put incharge to run it as an institution. This alliance with their direct beneficiaries particularly Karachi and upper crust of Punjab never pardoned Bhutto for that.

But listen:

Eik Mein Mar Kai Hazaroon Ko Janam Deta Hoon.

Aur Jallad Mujhe Maar Ke Pachtata Hain.

I have always been aware of the debacle of 1971 and the atrocities committed by the Pak army but never really gave it much thought. I am amazed how Pakistanis have collectively blocked this out of their concious.

Looking at my family in Lahore and Islamabad, many of whom are prominant members of the Army - it is shameful how they never talk about or acknowledge the events of 1971.Lets hope people start thinking about it now.

Reply #: 37 rajanjua

{Indra Gandhi made those comments in front of a joint session of your Parliament. Shows the mentality of your leaders. Indian intervention was fueled by revenge and not for any other reason. The amusing/sad part is that they were taking revenge for something that occured hundereds of years back. They should have taken solace in the fact that among hundreds of defeats there was after all one victory. Chauhan Sahib did win against Ghauri at Tarian (sp ?).}

The sad part is that some of the people here do not have their facts rights. Indira Gandhi didnot say those words in the parliament, neither did she say that on any forum. There is no record of her saying so.

What is even sadder is that my brothers do not remember their history. The muslims lost hold on India (what ever it was they had - however tenuous it may have been) from around the time of Aurangazeb. So really it was Akbar, jehangir,Shah Jahan - a mere 100 odd years. The invaders from outside India were very good at babarity(sp?).

Indeed the powerplay displayed by Aurangazeb is still around. He was the one who brought about the down fall of the empire - were it not for his greed for power. If he let succession progress as per the norm the Mughal empire would not have disappeared. Indeed this powerplay should be familiar to many who were around in the period from 1965-1975. So Aurangazeb type usupring of power is not new to the Muslims of India.

I would suggest that people think before they hit that keyboard and read a little bit of History.