Operation Searchlight

I think one of the things that is still present in the Pakistani psyche, about 71, even after accepting the overall blame, is that we still keep passing it around. Talk to a General, he will say it was the politicains fault. Talk to the politicians, they will say, it was what the people wanted. Talk to the people, and they will say it was the Army`s fault.

I think individuals are responsible for their own actions. To say that we were brainwashed, or didn`t know what we were doing, or were mislead by the leaders, is a cop out. This excuse can only be used by kids.

Adults of that time, cannot use this excuse. People cannot just get brainwashed. They do so willingly. They don`t speak out. One only gets brainwashed about something one wants to get brainwashed about (like the Americans about Iraq, or Indians about Kashmir, or Pakistanis about Bangladesh etc.).

Why didn`t the military officers of that time, speak out then? What was stopping them? They were not kids? I can say with 100% certainity, I would have spoken out, even if meant court martial. I would have fought to protect the Pakistan borders, from Indian attacks, but I would have opposed the civilian violence. I believe Sahibzada Yaqub did something similar.

Most of all why didn`t the population of Pakistan speak out? There is absolutely no way the Army could have taken the Bengali action, withouth the support of the West Pakstani people. Were there massive riots and marches going on in Pakistan, opposing the 71 action? Were they being suppressed by the Army? I have not read of any such marches or movements in West Pakistan. There was nothing like the current European marches agaisnt the Iraq War, during those days in Pakistan. It was more like the US populations` aceptance of the war.

Based on this, I think adults of that time, instead of providing excuses, and trying to absolve themselves of the blame, should stand up and accept it as their own individual mistake (unless they belonged to a group that did oppose it publicly).

Why do they keep voting for the exact same Bhutto family, when it was so openly involved in 71? Why do they keep voting the exact same PPP into power? Obviously, they are least bothered. I could understand if the PPP leadership has changed and new leaders were at the helm. But it is the exact same family.

I think the same thing will happen in a few years, in India, when all the actions in Kashmir, come to light. The same Indian civilians who are supporitng and justifying all of India`s brutal actions, will then pass the whole blame onto the leaders or the Army or politicians, trying to keep their hands clean. And the same thing will happen in the USA, if the USA`s Iraq policies are exposed. People will pass all the blame onto Bush, even though he was just following the opinion polls. The Democrat candidates have already started doing that, even though nearly each one of them voted for the war.

Speaking out against something, after the fact, requires very little courage. Truly courageous people speak out when the action is going on, even if they have to face personal losses.

You are right, Romair, Fernandes was the Minister of Kashmir for 3 months in 1990. It slipped my memory completely.

And yes, we Indians do not know too many details about our own government`s faults. I have always thought my countrymen are overly sanctimonious on the Kashmir issue. Though in general, we are well informed about most the government`s misdeeds. Everyone knows that the main blame for the Punjab issue lies with Indira, not Pakistan. The main blame for IPKF lies with Rajiv, not LTTE. However the awareness about what we have done in Kashmir or even North East is pretty low.

The country in South Asia which reaches the highest level of introspection, in my opinion, will be the strongest in the long run. Not the country that reaches the highest no. of textile exports or IT exports.

This though an admirable sentiment is a very gullible one. The country that has been at the lowest level of introspection in the last 100 years, USA, is the strongest in the world.

By the way, ``The Lost Revolution(or rebellion)`` by Manoj Joshi is one of the most candid and objective accounts of the Kashmir issue, along with details of all brutalities, Indian, Kashmiri as well as Pakistani.

By the way, what makes it tougher for Indians to accept our faults in kashmir, even as we do that in Sri Lanka and Punjab is the spectre of the Jihadi, which is a reality throughout the world. No Khalistani terrorist ever wanted to capture the red fort. The involvement of the extremist element puts an element of fear and hatred in the minds of most Indians. What this has led to is a feeling of being ``at war`` with the Jihadis and pakistan (both mean the same for most Indians nowadays). In a war like scenario, even the media thinks that exposing our own faults will demoralise us.

However let me break this to you - people are selfish all over the world. Until you start suppressing them, they will not revolt for someone else`s suppression. Even when you start suppressing them, you need to start suppressing each and every one of them to reach a critical mass for the revolt.

The examples of France, Britain and America doing so well does not really make a case for selflessness I am afraid. Yes, it is very bad, but that`s the way it is.

sighalph235:

``The human cost of the War was more than the dead, wounded, and missing. It was also the living.``

I am reminded of Faiz`s poem:

us tan kee taraf daikho jo qatl gaeh dil hai,
kya rakha hai maqtal main, aye chashm-e-tamashaee...

perhaps this is a misapplication of the poem. But along with the tragedy of masscares that comes out of the events of 1971, is the loss of the spirit of a nation- the latter is often overlooked in sadness over the blood spilt.

Romair:

The REASON anyone cannot be held responsible is PRECISELY because there are people who support the existence of faujiz in power! As long as there is no fair method of checks and balances politicians will ALWAYS play their cards balancing the accoutability they must show toward the people and FAR more signifcantly, making sure NOT to anger those who are the REAL source of power- ie the Faujiz. The Chamcha League though dispicable knows where the real source of power lies. It is playing what few cards it has to play. ZAB played his cards BECAUSE he also knew the Faujiz are the ultimate arbitrars of power.

Romair writes:

``There is absolutely no way the Army could have taken the Bengali action, withouth the support of the West Pakstani people. ``

Like there was absolutely now way the Faujiz could have deposed ZAB? Or cut the terms of BB and NS short twice?

You support the denial of fair democracy in Pakistan by making the excuse that the feudals will control everything. Or that democracy is too much and causes too much chaos in a society that is uneducated. Then you turn around and say that the people supported the military actions.

People like you want to have it every which way with. And so in the end when things get screwed up, you can spread blame around to keep your conscious clean.

I recommend a good exercise for you. Look yourself in the mirror and verbally say what you are saying here on chowk. See if it makes sense. Be honest.

ahmadmadani 126,

I completely agree with you, what pakistan lacks is culture. All of the local traditions, as you say the ;ove of language by the bengalis, to the festival of flying kites to watching romantic movies of the laila majnu type have been banned in pakistan.
The question of pakistan ka matlab kya still haunts the people.
The ilks of YLH and and tahmed have tried the line that pakistan exists and that is all what is important. But the fact remanins that pakistan was created for islam and as such has an obligation to go by the book.

Despite the emrgence of benazir bhutto, a female politician in an islamic country, thge country has progressed steadily on the islamic path. One cannot blame zia and afghanistan for the jihadisation of pakistan, no ruler elected or military has made a smallest step to move pakistan from the jihadic path. Each have built on the edifice created by the former rulers. Take the case of mushy, he has taken an un-compromising stand against the so called secular political parties of bhutto and nawaz while all the time supporting the jihadists.

At last there is some emerging concensus in pakistan that mushy is following the path set out by zia, he has at last brought into political dominance a jihadic party while vanquishing the others. For the first time the madrassa products of the pak army has its counterparts in the political system.

By crushing the bengalis to the pure entertainment of flying kites, at last the pakistanis can themselves answer the question, pakistan ka matlab kya, it is an islamic republic, with rules per the book. No mushy will change the blasphemy laws, the legalisation of honour killings, it is these elements from the book that form the answer to the question.

Yes, pakistan lacks a culture, but what is refreshing is the emergence of a new culture per the book. One can see it in the madrassas if faisalabad, now fully funded by the mushy govt as the saudi money dries up, one cann see that in the eyes of the parents who have maned their children `osama`.

#128 Romair,

``I can provide you with much more information, if you would like.``

Yes, please. Provide us info about training camps in POK.

Romair saab,

Your modest and unassuming ways are endearing.

I note you are firing off statistic after statistic. But as usual you never give yourself (or pakistan) any credit at all...

I mean...you never give statistics like:


1. number of training camps in POK for kashmir jihadis.

2. number of fresh recruits for kashmir jihad per month

3. amount of funds collected for kashmir jihad per month

4. amount paid to shaheed`s family.

5. average age of entry for recruits.


I`m sure you have first hand (or second hand at least) knowledge about these.

You bemoan the fact that no news is forthcoming from our kashmir except from the indian media. Same is true for POK.

If only you would share these POK statistics...we would be thankful.

- - - - - - -

Now, now...don`t abandon this thread because we ask this small favour.

;)

rozaiba #132: ``The REASON anyone cannot be held responsible is PRECISELY because there are people who support the existence of faujiz in power! As long as there is no fair method of checks and balances politicians will ALWAYS play their cards balancing the accoutability they must show toward the people and FAR more signifcantly, making sure NOT to anger those who are the REAL source of power- ie the Faujiz.``

Unfortunately, you are passing the blame also. Why not just accept it. I accept it. Why do you have problems accepting it.

Your comment is not factual either. There were political parties in West Pakistan that were actually in electoral alliances with Mujib and his Awami Party. Weren`t they afraid of the REAL source of power? Bhutto was not afraid of anyone. He was too powerful after the elections. He just wanted outright power, and to do so he had to get rid of Mujib. Somehow or the other.

Even within the military, there were Generals who opposed the actions. Weren`t they afraid of the REAL power?

Do you think people are slaves of the politicians and need their permission before taking any action. What stops you from acting independently? Do you need permission from BB in Dubai? No one can stop anyone from opposing anything, if their will is strong enough. There are no worldwide checks and balances against US invasions, yet look at the number of people out on the streets, in Europe opposign the Americans. In fact, there are people in Pakistan opposing it in the street.

This is why the maulvis in Pakistan always dominate the non-maulvis, even though the maulvis have fewer numbers. Non-maulvis are too cowardly and too prone to making excuses for not opposing something. Have you ever seen the followers of the maulvis present reasons like yours, when they oppose something? They come out on the streets, regardless of the consequences. It doesn`t matter if the govt. is military or not. Look at how many problems they have caused for Musharraf. If they believe their cause is correct, they are out there. Checks or balances or no checks or balances. Even though they are from a lower social strata than you and I. Why aren`t they afraid of the REAL power?

I did not support Zia in power, even though I was in the military. That was not easy to do, but I did it. You will however, see individuals on this site, who were pro-Zia during those days, and now all of a sudden are his biggest critics. I would not have supported Yahya Khan`s policies, specifically in Bangladesh, had I been old enough to oppose them.

Bhutto had a perfectly good chance of solving the 71 scenario, yet he did not. Why give him a clean chit? No one had a gun to his head. All the Generals of his time, got what they deserved. They were all booted out. Yet their are still West Pakistanis crying out loud for Bhutto`s family. Why not give them a boot over 71, also?

I think the differnce between your thinking and mine is that you equate BB and NS with democracy. And I don`t. They are dictators. And I oppose them. And they have proven to be corrupt failures. They don`t even hold elections in their own party. Between them and the maulvis and Musharraf, I will chose Musharraf. However, give me any other politician who is not a dictator and not massivley corrupt, as a potential head of Pakistan, and I will support him/her. In fact, the party I support, openly, is in opposition to the govt.

Always remeber, it is not that hard to oppose any government, be it fauji or otherwise. If people have the will. If today any Pakistani govt., be it fauji or otherwise, invaded, for example, Sri Lanka, I would oppose it. I would not rely on excuses of, ``Checks and balances,`` and REAL power.

You cannot just write off 71 to a fauji govt. Or to even Bhutto, for that matter. You are just passing the blame. You need to accept the blame yourself, if you were an adult at that time (though I think you are too young at the time, as was I).

fountainheader #113: I agree with pretty much what you have stated.

You seem to be a new interactor. It should be educational, exchanging views with you on this issue. I have lost count of how many Indian interactors have declared me a persona non-grata, everytime I have quoted from international sites, on India`s actions on Kashmir. I was expecting the same from you. Surprisingly you did not :-)

Are we finally starting to see the beginings of some introspection from the Indian side :-)

``This though an admirable sentiment is a very gullible one. The country that has been at the lowest level of introspection in the last 100 years, USA, is the strongest in the world.``

You are probably correct again. Perhaps I am too idealistic. There are actually two ways to success. One is through massive economic progress, with or without introspection. If that does not occur, then introspection. So I should rephrase and state that the country, in South Asia, that is the more introspective and/or carries out the most ecnomic progress will be the most sucessful in the long run. Since, South Asian countries are very weak on economic progress, introspection is all they have left.

Also, I think the USA culture is very introspective. They only lost their introspection in foreign policy, after Israel got a hold of their govt. Most of the battles they are fighting are actually more Israel`s battels, than their own.

``By the way, ``The Lost Revolution(or rebellion)`` by Manoj Joshi is one of the most candid and objective accounts of the Kashmir issue, along with details of all brutalities, Indian, Kashmiri as well as Pakistani.``

I will have to check it out. A French (French-Indian?) guy named Oberio has reported a lot, also. I generally follow Khushwant Singh, Arundhati Roy and Praful Bidwai as my Indian sources. They seem quite objective. If you want to know my views on the issue, they are basically identical to the views of the above three.

Other than that, I usually try to avoid Indian and Pakistani authors on the subject.

``By the way, what makes it tougher for Indians to accept our faults in kashmir, even as we do that in Sri Lanka and Punjab is the spectre of the Jihadi, which is a reality throughout the world. No Khalistani terrorist ever wanted to capture the red fort. The involvement of the extremist element puts an element of fear and hatred in the minds of most Indians. What this has led to is a feeling of being ``at war`` with the Jihadis and pakistan (both mean the same for most Indians nowadays). In a war like scenario, even the media thinks that exposing our own faults will demoralise us.``

I agree again. Pakistan govt. has its own axe to grind in Kashmir. It is using the Kashmiris also. Pakistan and India are like two fleas, fighting over who owns the dog. Pakistan should stop militancy from its side. In the process, the Kashmiris are getting harmed.

There is one difference though. I think Pakistani people, on the whole, have agreed to disown their ownership of Kashmir. Now they are willing to accept whatever the Kashmiris want, including union with India. This is openly expressed in the media, also. This has been shown in surveys, in Pakistan, carried out by Indian magazine(s). This is why you will see a whole range of views, on Kashmir, from Pakistanis on this site - from completely forgetting about it to fighiting for it.

This is what I see missing from the Indian side. The views of the Indian govt., the Indian media, and the India populace (and nearly all Indian interactors on this site) are in one line. Atut Ang. This is where introspection needs to come in.

I think the current overtures by the Indian govt. to the APHC are good. If they can sort out something between themselves, even without the involvement of Pakistan, I would support it.

Sigleph235 # 121

Mitti Masud was very senior senior to me. I think Sahibzada Yaqub and he are the few sensible faujis who thought otherwise - and did not agree with Govt policies.

Azam Khan was another Fauji who seemed to have done well there as a Governor from the viewpoint of development.

Incidently, we recently had our Sargodha Old Boys 50 years re-union and 70 Bengla Deshi`s with families came to attend it. It included the Pricipal Secretary to the Bagla Desh Prime Minister. MD of Bangla Desh Biman. Some retired generals, doctors, busiessman, politicians - the Bangla Desh Air Chief who is also from the school could not come because of his engagement.

Old Boys Association has completed a school project at Tandio Allayar in Sind - best campus in Pakistan. The Bengla Deshi`s also want to set up a similar school near Dacca, Musharaf who was present at the ceremony said that Pakistan will match the grant given to the school by the Bangla Desh Government. 5 seats have been reserved for students from Bangla Desh.

#118 Fountainheader ``The threat to India on the Eastern theatre was not that Pakistan maintained a huge army presence there........the threat was in the fact that the Eastern neighbour was also Pakistan.

And while the Bangladeshi army may be stronger than what the erstwhile Pakistanis maintained,it is not too much of a threat. A pain in the wrong places at times, perhaps, like a couple of years back when they got into a tiff with the BSF.

Now since what we have there is a small country, we can afford to just station a few companies there and turn our attention westwards. Earlier our doing this would have been conditional to the troop presence in EP.``

What India actually managed to obtain was:

- Create a physically cohesive Pakistan unlike earlier when the two parts were a 1000 miles away and it was a logistical nightmare to re-supply East from the West. In the post- 1971 Pakistan it is also easier to move troops and para forces swiftly from one part to another

- Hastened up the development of Pakistan`s atomic program as Pakistan realised it had to go nuclear if it was to survive in its remaining shape & form. Who knows what some Indian leader would have thought a few years or decades after 1971 (people like Advani come to mind, and also the late K. Sunderji & Rajiv-remember Brasstacks) and start another conventional war in order to break Pakistan into even smaller pieces to ``further reduce the threat`` on its Western borders. The realisation after the break-up was that we probably will never be able to match India in conventional terms. So we have to go nuclear and show India that the price of a similar adventure will be much much heavier next time around.

- Motivated people like A.Q. Khan & other scientists to come to Pakistan and start working wholeheartedly on the nuclear program. I remember reading in a book that A.Q. Khan decided to come to Pakistan after he saw the 16th December surrender ceremony on Dutch T.V.

- Made it very clear to all the governments in Pakistan (both civilian & military- remember Bhutto & Zia both fervently followed up on the nuclear program without let) that without a credible threat to India, there probably will be no country left to govern. So better hurry up with that nuclear program.

- Put Pakistani people`s opinion firmly behind developing a nuclear deterrence. After 1971 it has been much easier to obtain Pakistani public`s support against India by referring to the break-up and India`s role in it.

- And a humiliated Army that seeks to take revenge for the ignominy it had to go through in 1971.

So did India really manage to reduce the threat from Pakistan by breaking it into two?

Now to the brain-washing phenomenon. The Pakistani public may be guilty of ignoring what was going on in East Pakistan and not protresting the killings, but are they guilty in the same league as the bureaucrats, politicians & Army folks who were at the helm of affairs?

Consider this:

-Even now the literacy rate in Pakistan is around 40%. How much was it in 1971? I don`t know.. but much much lesser I can safely assume. How was an illiterate population to find out what was really going on? And how can the Pakistani population of 1971 be compared to the U.S population with 97% literacy rate and all the resources in the world to find out what their Pres. is really up to?

- Both the wings were a 1000 miles away and there was no direct contact between East & West Pakistanis to find out what was going on in the East. Not many West Pakistanis travelled to the West and vice versa.

- Not many people had Television. Even if they did, all that it was probably showing was state propaganda. There was no CNN, BBC or other alternate media for the people to turn to. Even if there had been, how many would have understood English in the first place?

The state propaganda was that some Bengalis have been brainwashed by the Indians, the Hindu teachers in East Pakistan have brainwashed their Muslim students, our army is not fighting a freedom struggle but some miscreants of the Mukti Bahini etc. etc. And this propaganda was doled out day in and day out. Without much alternative news to look at back in 1971, what would the public do?

I believe till 15 December our media was reporting that we are about to win the war & our forces are making great progress. Everyone was dumbstruck when the news of surrender came on the 16th. That was the level of propaganda.

It is also a common practice to put all the blame of 1965 & 1971 wars on Bhutto. I have observed this in many Urdu books & in columns in Urdu newspapers like Jang & Nawa-i-Waqt, and also after talking to Army people. The reasoning basically goes like this:

``Bhutto was the one who started the 65 war. He was the one who actually convinced Ayub that India will not take any action across the international border if Pakistan put pressure on the Kashmir sector``

May be it is true and may be its not. May be it is just another excuse for the army to push all the blame on others for the mess it makes every now and then in Pakistan. And if it is true, how can a Field Marshall President be absolved of his responsibilities. If he were so innocent and gullible to wrong advice what was he doing being the all in all of Pakistan since 1958? Will we accept Bush`s apology if he tomorrow says,``I am so sorry. I was so innocent. It was only Condy Rice, Wolfowitz & Rumsfeld who (mis)led me to the war in Iraq. Blame them because they advised me to do it. Don`t blame me, beacuse I was only following their advice`` Doesn`t work that way.

Bhutto cannot be excused if he gave this type of advice to Ayub. But there are all types of advisers giving all types of advices to leaders. It is up to the leaders to pick the ones they deem to be most reasonable and ultimately the leaders are the ones most responsible for the decisions. They cannot pick the wrong advice and then blame everything on the adviser if things go wrong. The Big Boss is ultimately responsible. This happens in all the big corporations, and in all civilised countries. It`s only in Pakistan that the whole blame is shifted to a civilian by Army`s propaganda machniery whenever there is a failure, be it 1965 (Bhutto convinced Ayub that India will not attack across International borders), 1971 (Bhutto said Idher hum-Udher tum and all hell broke lose. Otherwise we were all lovey dovey with the Bengalis) & Kargil (we were winning-Nawaz sold us out to Clinton). I am amazed why the Army hasn`t so far come up with a spin to blame Siachen fiasco on a civilian too.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Joke of the week from Romair:

[quote]
I generally follow Khushwant Singh, Arundhati Roy and Praful Bidwai as my Indian sources. They seem quite objective
[end-quote]

Here is an equivalent:

I generally follow Bernard Lewis, Richard Pipes and Ibn Warraq as my sources for islam. They seem quite objective.

Nuff said.

``generally follow Khushwant Singh, Arundhati Roy and Praful Bidwai as my Indian sources. They seem quite objective
[end-quote]

Here is an equivalent:

I generally follow Bernard Lewis, Richard Pipes and Ibn Warraq as my sources for islam. They seem quite objective. ``

Touche.

RE: #137 by Mukhlis

You have hit at least a half dozen ``sixers`` (to borrow from Cricket) in your Reply.

The People of Pakistan knew very little of what their Army was doing in Bangladesh.

They were continually informed that ``Indian Agents`` were being sought there.

Bhutto was not an innocent bystander in many events. But he has been used as an excuse

by too many others for their own failures.

Bhutto`s biggest problem was that he had streaks of a genius. In spite of his

many personal failings he was the only true National leader Pakistan has had since the

Quaid.

He is now long gone and did not deserve such a fate. Nor did Sheikh Mujib.

The game was obviously bigger than both of them.

re: nazarhayatkhan # 138

You forget to mention the name of Admiral Ahsan, who was the governor of East Pakistan and who disagreed with the policies of the government in Islamabad. He is one of the few Pakistanis, in the military from that time period, who is still fondly remembered by the people of Bangladesh.

I remember a conversation with my mother. The topic of the conversation was a discussion my father and a friend of his had in Peshawar. He told my father that it ``was all over``; said they were 24 federal secretaries in all of Pakistan and out of these, only four were Bengali. He was a friend of my father`s from the time when my father was posted in Dacca in the early 1950s.

Ciao

stuka: on ``Khushwant Singh, Arundhati Roy and Praful Bidwai`` as commentators on indian society and `` Bernard Lewis, Richard Pipes and Ibn Warraq`` on muslim.

i have read a bit of or about all of them, and everything i have read or heard indicates that they deserve to be heard with respect by all (including members of the respective communities of which they write).

i would not pay much attention if it was some moron like jay ridiculing these people. but if even you think negatively of them too (IF you do), then perhaps you could cut and paste (IF it does not take more than a couple of minutes of your time) something they have written that does not make sense.