![]() |
| Dr Muhammad Yunus (R), Chief Adviser of Bangladesh Interim Government meets Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif (L) at Cairo - Photo Collected |
Saturday, December 21, 2024
Pakistan Must Reconcile with Bangladesh's 1971 Painful Legacy
Saturday, December 16, 2023
Victory Day To Commemorate The 1971 War Of Bangladesh
SALEEM SAMAD
Vijay Diwas or Victory Day is celebrated in Bangladesh and observed in India to commemorate the victory of Indian forces in a battle against the ‘occupation’ Pakistan military and the liberation of Bangladesh.
The fall of Dhaka was indeed the greatest achievement of a military battle in years to come, which culminated in a surrender ceremony on December 16, 1971.
The brutal war of Bangladesh's independence came with a heavy cost of the supreme sacrifice of thousands of fallen soldiers of the Indian Army and Mukti Bahini (Bangladesh Liberation Force).
With the surrender of 93,000 troops, officers and staff of government offices and their family members became prisoners of war (POW) under the Geneva Convention of 1949.
With heads down in shame, the defeated soldiers laid down their weapons. Ranks from their uniform were removed and taken away by the Indian army to military garrisons as POWs.
After several wars between India and Pakistan, it was indeed a humiliating defeat for Pakistan in the eastern war theatre.
Pakistan's government in Islamabad and the military headquarters in Rawalpindi gave hope to their military and civilians that China would open a battlefront with India, which would divert the Indian Mountain Division to hold the incursion.
Simultaneously the United States Seventh Fleet would move into the Bay of Bengal to provide aerial support to block Indian Air Force to provide ground support to the advancing Indian forces and the Mukti Bahini.
Nothing happened! China did not dare to push into India as snow-capped mountains were difficult to cross. There was no movement of the People's Liberation Army of China from their warm quarters. The US fleet also did not sail into the Indian Ocean after threats by the Soviet Union.
The India-Pakistan war in the eastern sector created history. The nine months to freedom was the shortest war of independence of the last century compared to the war in Vietnam, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Namibia and scores of other countries gained after protracted bloody wars.
After WWII, it was the only battle that ended with a surrender ceremony at Dhaka. The Instrument of Surrender was signed by Lieutenant General Jagjit Singh Aurora, who was the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief Eastern Command and Pakistan's Eastern Command General A. A. K. Niazi, who corroborated the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani soldiers to India — the world's largest surrender in terms of number of personnel since World War II.
The war created the largest number of 10 million war refugees sheltered in squalid camps in neighbouring states with Bangladesh. Another information is that the majority of the refugees have returned home.
The war-torn Bangladesh government had to undertake a gigantic post-war rehabilitation programme to settle the returnees in their villages.
As a foot soldier with the Mukti Bahini deployed in Dhaka under Sector 2 commanded by Major ATM Haider, I witnessed the demoralised Pakistan troops in the capital being driven to POW camps.
During my recent visit to the Northeast Indian states of Assam and Tripura, I found among different professions and backgrounds a keen interest in Bangladesh-India bilateral relations, especially improving connectivity between the northeast states with Bangladesh.
Of course, the interest is centred on one-sided upcoming elections in Bangladesh with threats of opposition in the battle of votes.
Of course, the Awami League will make a land-slide victory led by Sheikh Hasina, the daughter of the independence hero Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who is popularly known as ‘Bangabandhu’. Hasina will surely go into the Guinness Book of World Records for being the longest-serving women prime minister in the world.
A couple of years ago, the Guwahati-Dhaka bus service began with fanfare. The public transport needs to be rolling to augment people-to-people contact.
The bus service between Agartala and Dhaka is functioning. The much-expected Agartala-Kolkata train connectivity through Dhaka is expected in 2024.
Lots of enthusiasm was found after the news of the Guwahati-Dhaka and Agartala-Chattogram flights appeared in the media in the Northeast.
It is expected that trade, commerce, and connectivity will bring the neighbouring states with the return of the Awami League government with Northeast states closer than before.
First in G-Plus digital newspaper, Guwahati, Assam, India, 16 December 2023
Saleem Samad is an award-winning independent journalist based in Bangladesh. A media rights defender with the Reporters Without Borders (@RSF_inter). Recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad
Wednesday, June 14, 2023
Is US encouraging rise of Bangladesh’s Islamist party to counter Sheikh Hasina?
SALEEM SAMAD
The next parliament elections are around the corner, expected in January 2024. The hardline Islamist political party Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) after 10 years of hiatus held its first rally in Dhaka, on June 10.
The three-hour-long event was held amid a huge deployment of riot police in armed gear and hundreds of armed officers in plain clothes, at the auditorium in the heart of the capital. Thousands of its members, who were unable to find space in the hall, spilt over in the compound and also occupied half of the streets. There was no law and order situation.
In a sudden move, the capital Dhaka’s police chief permitted on certain conditions, which raised eyebrows of the journalists, political observers, civil society and left-leaning parties.
Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan on Sunday said that Awami League’s policy regarding Jamaat-e-Islami has not “changed our position.”
Several political observers argue that the threat of the United States visa policy has given extra mileage in obtaining permission. The US visa policy for Bangladesh says it would clamp down restrictions on officials, governing party leaders and the opposition in defence of democracy. This includes those responsible for voter intimidation, vote rigging, denial of free speech or freedom of assembly, and violence that seeks to undermine free and fair elections.
Moving away from tough repressive measures against the opposition, the district civil officials and police administration in holding elections of the local government or by-elections to the parliament are extra cautious in violating compliance stated by the US State Department on May 3.
Thus, the Islamist party got the desired “verbal permission” on the eve of their rally, after the police cancelled an event of a youth wing of another political party at the same venue.
The JeI rally has brought together the party leaders and members on a three-point demand which includes: elections under a caretaker government; release of their leaders and members in prison; control of the prices of essential grocery items.
JeI leaders claimed that in 14 years of Awami League era, nearly 1.5 lakh legal harassment cases are on their heads, and nearly 14,000 leaders and members are languishing in prisons, including their national ameer (chief) Dr Shafiqur Rahman, nayeb-e-ameer (vice-president) ANM Shamsul Islam and secretary general Mia Golam Porwar.
In their list of demands are to open the JeI’s party offices across the country, and permission for political assembly, which they pointed out that has been guaranteed by the Constitution – the Constitution which they do not recognise.
The JeI leaders have offered dialogue with the government on developing a framework for an interim government to hold free, fair, inclusive and credible elections and also ensure a level-playing field for all political parties.
The Islamist calls JeI a political party, but a majority of the people in Bangladesh are aware of the organisation’s antecedent – their demonic role during the brutal war of independence.
Fearing streets violence, the police headquarters ceased permission for JeI from February 2013 after the arrests of the party’s key leaders including their national ameer Matiur Rahman Nizami, secretary general Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid, assistant secretary general Abdul Quader Molla and assistant secretary general ATM Azharul Islam indicted for war crimes in 1971.
In the 2008 election, Sheikh Hasina led Awami League had returned to power after a landslide victory. Her electoral promise to the nation was the trial of those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in 1971 must face the music of justice.
Bangladesh’s International (War) Crimes Tribunal awarded capital punishments to scores of JeI, other Muslim parties and Islamist leaders. The tribunal considering an elderly person gave sentences for imprisonment until death to Ghulam Azam, former JeI chief in 1971, for recruitment, aiding and abetting with the marauding Pakistan military.
The Islamic evangelist leader Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, a key figure with JeI and his Muslim militia were held responsible for the deaths and rape of hundreds of Hindu community and pro-independence compatriots in southern Bangladesh in 1971, says Barrister Tapash Kanti Baul, a prosecutor in the tribunal.
In the first year of Bangladesh’s independence, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the liberation war hero passed the world’s second secular Constitution after the Muslim majoritarian Turkey.
The Constitution had a blanket ban on religious political parties. The dreaded Jamaat-e-Islami party by default was struck off.
The newly born country has gone through the pains and agony of the bloody liberation war when Pakistan forces committed wanton war crimes and rape as a weapon of war. Their henchmen of the radicalised Muslim party, JeI in the name of Islam had committed genocide and extra-judicial killings of hundreds of intellectuals by a secret death squad Al Badr.
In a landmark judgement the Bangladesh High Court on August 1, 2013, deregistered the Islamist party, Jamaat-e-Islami, thereby banning it from participating in future elections.
The court found several contradictions between the principles of the JeI party’s manifesto (available on their website and printed documents) with the Bangladesh Constitution.
The JeI wishes to establish an Islamic Republic [of Bangladesh] instead of a secular country for which it sacrificed in blood in 1971. The Quran & Sunnah will override the state Constitution; implement the strictest Islamic Sharia laws and protect the Hindus and other religious minorities in an Islamic country.
The petitioner of the public interest litigation for the deletion of JeI’s registration with the Bangladesh Election Commission (EC) in the High Court, Maulana Ziaul Hasan, fails to understand how the EC will act JeI’s plans to participate in the elections after being deregistered.
Hasan, who is also the president of Bangladesh Sommilito Islami Jote (United Islamic Alliance), a like-minded platform against political Islam and an outspoken secularist is obviously worried about the rise of Islamism.
JeI documents claim their founder was controversial Islamic leader Syed Abul A’la Maududi, founder of Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan. He is responsible to instigate the worst racial riots in 1953 after the partition, which killed 200 Ahmadiyya Muslims after Maududi’s disciples heard his ‘Fatwa’ which mandates the Sunni Muslims in Pakistan to kill the heretics and infidels.
Barrister Tania Amir, a leading human rights lawyer argued in the court on behalf of the PIL against JeI registration that, “The Jamaat in principle does not recognise the powers of the Republic which belongs to the people, nor does it accept the undisputed power of the people’s representatives to make laws. The party discriminates against people based on religion and, therefore, should have its registration cancelled long ago.”
In December 2018, as the general election was approaching, the Bangladesh Election Commission scrapped its registration in accordance with the higher court’s verdict. Thus, JeI was rocking in troubled waters, as they were not eligible to participate in the elections and the party was in jeopardy.
The JeI members hurriedly negotiated with their all-weather ally, the rightist Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) to be able to contest more than 20 seats, and they drowned.
For the last 12 years, the rhetoric of several top echelons of Awami League and senior Ministers reiterated their party’s position to make a law to ban Jamaat-e-Islami which ruthlessly opposed the independence of Bangladesh in being complicit to war crimes committed by Pakistan’s occupation military forces.
The policymakers did not hesitate to say that banning JeI is a matter of time. Now it seems those were empty promises.
The change of heart is understood by political analyst Sohrab Hasan. JeI has recently broken away from the BNP alliance. JeI is deemed an alternative to the government if BNP boycotts the upcoming elections, he wrote in the largest circulated newspaper Prothom Alo.
It seems that the same senior Ministers made a U-Turn on their rhetoric against JeI. As Dr Hasan Mahmud, Minister for Information and Broadcasting and also Joint General Secretary of Awami League said on Sunday that Jamaat-e-Islami was not banned. “Any political party can hold rallies. As long as it is not prohibited, they have the right to hold rallies,” he explained.
While Law Minister Anisul Huq said on Sunday that Jamaat-e-Islami should “not be termed guilty until the party is convicted.”
The judges have given their opinion that JeI should be banned based on sufficient evidence that came in the verdicts delivered by the war crimes tribunal.
The Saturday event has given a message that JeI is not weak and was able to brainwash thousands more youths in radical Islamic ideology.
After the war crimes tribunal indicted the key leadership of JeI, the party was demoralised but survived in a turbulent political climate.
After the tragic assassination of Sheikh Mujib in a military putsch in mid-August 1975, the regime of General Ziaur Rahman (later president) in May 1976 abrogated Clause 38 of the Constitution which bars the formation of a religious party.
Overnight the dreaded JeI resurfaced from the dead and began politicking, but of the tainted history of their engagement against the people of the country, they strategically changed its name to Islamic Democratic League.
The JeI bagged six seats in the 1979 parliament under a military dictator General Rahman. Surprisingly, the six JeI’s elected in the constituencies were all bordering the India-Bangladesh.
Fortunately, the people understood and rejected the Islamist party, which could be understood from the subsequent elections. JeI on average received nearly 4 per cent vote, said political scientist Dr Imtiaz Ahmed.
In the 1991 election after the departure of another military junta of General HM Ershad, JeI was elected in 18 seats, which was crucial for Khaleda Zia to form a coalition government. Despite a clear win, Awami League had to be seated on the opposition bench in the parliament as the party failed to muster a majority to form a government.
Awami League’s influential general secretary Obaidul Quader, hours after the event said the opposition BNP is behind Jamaat-e-Islami’s rally to conspire against the democratic process and jeopardise the forthcoming elections.
Indeed it’s rare in the world’s political history that a party which opposed the independence of a country had remained resilient and defiantly returned to politics, despite key leaders of the JeI leaders being handed down maximum punishment by the war crimes by the war crimes tribunal.
First published in the India Narrative, New Delhi, India on 14 June 2023
(Saleem Samad is an award-winning independent journalist based in Bangladesh. Views expressed are personal. Twitter: @saleemsamad)
Monday, November 28, 2022
Why Pakistan Army blames the 1971 debacle on the politicians?
SALEEM SAMAD
The outgoing Pakistan Chief of Army Staff (COAS), General Qamar Javed Bajwa in one of the several farewells meetups categorically said “1971 was not a military, but a political failure. Our army fought courageously in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).”
He lamented that those fallen martyrs of the Pakistan Army were never honoured and people have forgotten them and politicians never mention their sacrifice.
He made a desperate attempt to “correct” the narrative of 1971 and stated facts regarding the debacle, and said the number of [Pakistan] soldiers fighting [in eastern war theatre] was not 92,000 but 34,000 while the others were in different government departments.
Quoting his speech he said, “Against these heavy odds, our army fought bravely and gave exemplary sacrifices which were acknowledged by Indian Army chief Field Marshal Manekshaw.”
By ‘against these heavy odds’, General Bajwa meant that 34,000 Pakistani soldiers were confronted by an Indian Army of 250,000 soldiers and 200,000 members of the Mukti Bahini.
Such mind-blogging narratives of Bajwa have also shaken the political and military historians in Pakistan.
Shouldn’t you feel that Gen Bajwa needs to update his knowledge of the political history leading to the liberation war in 1971 and the humiliating defeat of the marauding Pakistan armed forces in the eastern war theatre?
The brutal birth of Bangladesh experienced the genocide of three million, rape as a weapon of war of tens of thousands of women, and brutal murder of thousands of intellectuals committed by the occupation Pakistan military and their henchmen recruited to kill, torture, rape and of course loot to frustrate the war of independence.
When the dreadful ‘Operation Searchlight’ was launched at midnight on 25th March 1971 in Dhaka and later spread to the rest of the country, the Pakistan military perpetrated the genocidal campaign under the military dictator General Yahya Khan.
Apologetic General Shaheb was a school student in 1971. But while in the military academy and later when he was climbing the ladders of his career in Rawalpindi GHQ. he must have read the Justice Hamidoor Rahman Commission Report regarding the debacle in 1971.
He need not read any documents or books published in Bangladesh on the 1971 war. It is believed that he must have come across scores of books penned by senior military officers of Pakistan, as well as by Indians who were on the battleground.
Does any of the documents and books claim that it was a failure of the politicians? In the helms of affairs were senior military hawks in Rawalpindi GHQ along with the civil bureaucrats in Islamabad.
Pakistan was sans political government since 1958 and continued till 1972. A political government took charge after an election in 1977 under a fresh constitution.
Pakistan lived under military rule since 1958 when General Ayub Khan led a bloodless coup and became the self-styled President of the country. He abrogated the 1956 historic constitution and accused many senior and junior ministers of the United Front mostly from East Bengal (now Bangladesh) of corruption and were tried in kangaroo military courts.
The 1970 elections, incidentally were held under a Martial Law regime, which arbitrarily denied the handover of political power to an elected majoritarian party Awami League.
Therefore the outgoing Pakistan COAS blaming the debacle on the shoulders of politicians was from his fairytale dream.
The military hawks in Rawalpindi were the mastermind of the crackdown and was cleared from the headquarters of the Chief Martial Law Administrator (CMLA), according to Major General Khadim Hussain Raja’s book ‘A Stranger In My Own Country’.
The book describes that during January and early February 1971, military dictator General Yahya had visualised the possibility of a military crackdown accompanied by the suspension of all political activity.
The top commanders in Dhaka had the opinion that it would be sheer ‘lunacy’ to attempt the operation at that time.
On 27 February 1971, Gen Raja gave formal orders to brigade commanders to be prepared for Operation Blitz into action.
Soon both Lieutenant General Yaqub Khan and Admiral S.M. Ahsan were denied access to President Yahya when he arrived in Dhaka for a series of parleys, primarily with Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
The two top brasses Admiral S.M. Ahsan, Governor of East Pakistan and Lieutenant General Yaqub Khan, Commander of the Eastern Command in Dhaka were unceremoniously removed by Rawalpindi GHQ for dilly-dally in executing the crackdown.
The duo instead appealed to President Yahya to forget about the “military solution” to the political impasse and hold dialogue with Sheikh Mujib, chief of Awami League to discuss the Six-Point, which was found scribed in the ‘Strategy, Diplomacy, Humanity: Life and Work of Sahabzada Yaqub’ as a threat to security and sovereignty of Pakistan.
He states that “I am convinced there is no military solution, which can make sense in the present situation. I am consequently unable to accept the responsibility for implementing a mission namely, a military solution, that would mean civil war and large-scale killings of unarmed civilians and would achieve no sane aim. It would have disastrous consequences,” Sahabzada Yaqub concluded.
The military hawks, according to Brigadier A. R. Siddiqi’s book ‘East Pakistan the Endgame’ understands that in March, the Rawalpindi was growing impatient for the delay of the crackdown.
The military dictator angry with General Yakub replaced him and appointed Lieutenant General Tikka Khan, who was known as the “Butcher of Balochistan”. The message of the replacement was loud and clear.
In midst of the dialogue, the infamous Operation Searchlight was launched. Several historians explain that military hawks kept in mind the dreadful operation and the parley was a ploy.
The plan for Operation Searchlight was quickly adopted by Yahya Khan and implemented when he was still in Dhaka. How can Bajwa attribute the humiliating defeat to a “political failure”?
First published in The News Times, November 28, 2022
Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleemsamad@hotmail.com>; Twitter @saleemsamad
Wednesday, March 09, 2022
Why Did Pakistan Crackdown In Bangladesh, Balochistan In March?
SALEEM SAMAD
It may be coincidental that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has a weakness for the month of March!
The Islamic nation-state possibly felt the month of March was a ‘holy’ month or lucky month for the ruthless crackdown in Balochistan and after 23 years sadistically repeated it in Bangladesh.
Maybe the fortune-tellers to the military hawks in Rawalpindi decide their evil actions on the particular month of March. Whatever the motive, the evil axis occurred in March.
The regime in Rawalpindi launched fierce genocidal ‘Operation Searchlight’ in Bangladesh on the night of 25 March 1971.
In the nine months to freedom, 3 million martyrs were victims of genocide, and more than 400,000 women were raped as a weapon of war. Possibly the world’s largest war refugee was created in living history. More than 10 million war refugees took shelter in neighbouring India.
The Pakistan junta did not realise they will experience a humiliating defeat in December 1971. After the Second World War, another formal surrender occurred when 93,000 Pakistan troops signed the instrument of surrender at Dhaka on 16 December 1971.
Before the crackdown in Bangladesh in March 1971, Pakistan’s invasion of the largest princely states Balochistan on 27 March 1948 killed several thousand innocent Baloch. Their struggle for independence still rages in the rugged terrain of Balochistan.
However, the Pakistan official narratives claim that the State of Kalat acceded to Pakistan on 27 March after Mohammad Ali Jinnah sent a confidential letter to ‘Khan of Kalat’.
Jinnah was legal adviser to ‘Khan of Kalat’ and with his full knowledge, the Pakistan military attacked and invaded Quetta, the capital of Balochistan.
Well, history says differently. Balochistan became an independent country on 4 August 1947, much ahead of the independence of Pakistan on 14 August 1947.
The declaration of independence of Balochistan was announced on 11 August 1947, three days before Pakistan was created. Unfortunately, the independence of Balochistan was short-lived and lasted for 252 days.
Before the partition of India and Pakistan, Balochistan consisted of four princely states of Kalat, Lasbela, Kharan and Makran under the British Raj. Two of these provinces, Lasbela and Kharan, were ‘fiduciary states’ placed under Khan of Kalat’s rule by the British, as was Makran which was a district of Kalat.
In the notorious month of March, many political events occurred. On 23 March 1956, the road to military rule was paved when General Iskander Mirza was sworn in as the first President of Pakistan.
On 25 March 1969, in a bloodless coup d’état Pakistan Army chief General Yahya Khan took over power from General Ayub Khan, a dictator of a decade and proclaim Martial Law and dissolved the assemblies.
Pakistan first tried to trick the leaders of Balochistan into joining the renegade part of India in the name of ‘Muslim’, but when both Houses of Balochistan unanimously refused to annexe with Pakistan angered the hierarchy, then based in Karachi.
After the bloody independence of Bangladesh, the Pakistan troops were still Prisoners of War (POWs) in India, the Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto to rejuvenate the demoralised Pakistan troops, gave responsibilities to “Butcher of Bengal” General Tikka Khan, then army chief to crack down on Baloch separatists and dissidents.
Subsequently, the military operation against separatists commenced in Balochistan in 1973 and the armed nationalist movement was brutally suppressed. The fiercest Baloch people have been struggling against Pakistan’s occupation and fought in 1948, 1958, 1962 and 1974.
What is more frustrating for Pakistan is that it failed to defeat the Baloch liberation struggle despite killing thousands of Baloch nationalists. More than 20,000 were victims of enforced disappearances and “dumping”. Those captured were brutally tortured and bullet-ridden bodies of thousands of Baloch political prisoners are found on the roadside.
The brutal torture of state forces includes gouging the eyes of the victims, cutting their tongues, noses, amputating their limbs, drilling holes in their bodies and many other inhuman and brutal mediums of torture. Pakistan junta is still paying an enormous price for the crackdown in Balochistan.
First published in The News Times, 9 March 2022
Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleemsamad@hotmail.com>; Twitter @saleemsamad
Tuesday, April 06, 2021
Understanding Arab world’s response to Bangladesh Liberation War
![]() |
| Liberation war guerrillas with Bangladesh flag - Photo: Anwar Hossain Foundation |
SALEEM SAMAD
The conspicuous silence of the Arab world in 1971 shouldn’t be interpreted as mysterious, as the Muslim countries blatantly supported Pakistan’s occupation of Bangladesh.
The heavily censored media of the Arabs failed to speak out on the crimes against humanity, war refugees, and the persecution of people who dreamed of an independent homeland.
Overtly, China, the United States, and the rest of the Arab countries joined Pakistan without understanding what conspired after the crackdown of “Operation Searchlight,” a genocidal campaign to neutralize the self-determination of its Eastern province (now Bangladesh).
The Arabs were carried away by the conspiracy theory that a Hindu nation, India, had hatched plans to bifurcate the world’s largest Muslim nation -- Pakistan, and eventually colonize East Pakistan.
Well, the culture, language, tradition, heritage, physical features, and even the weather of the four provinces of Pakistan were starkly different from East Bengal.
The only bond between the five provinces (including East Bengal) of Pakistan was laid on the thin rope of Islam. Fresh jargons of “Islam is in danger” were repeatedly heard since the weak “Unity Government” was overthrown in a bloodless military coup d’état in 1958.
Mohammad Redowanul Karim, a researcher on Islamic history and culture writes: “Consequently, an independent Bangladesh was inevitable. After starting the Liberation War of Bangladesh in 1971, the myth that Islam was a stronger binding force than cultural heritage [was] refuted.”
The Liberation War and independence of Bangladesh shattered the much talked about “Two-Nation Theory” articulated by the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah.
The doctrine rationalized the division of India politically into two independent nations -- India and Pakistan -- in the 1940s on the eve of the winding up of the British rule in India.
The Arab leaders were convinced that Pakistan’s military operations, besides flushing out “miscreants” and anti-Islamic terrorists, are also exterminating “kafirs” (or kufrs) from the “Muslim holy land.”
Therefore, it’s obvious that Pakistan, under the state obligation, had to exercise excessive force to restore law and order -- blaming the political crisis on Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, his Awami League, and millions of his sympathizers in the eastern province.
The Arabs were also convinced that to restore a political crisis, the military had to come down heavily. Most importantly, India had to be given a “befitting reply” for “interfering into internal affairs of Pakistan,” as repeated by Radio Pakistan.
The Arab leaders unwittingly provided moral, spiritual, political, and diplomatic support to Pakistan, despite knowing the marauding army was committing genocide and ethnic cleansing of religious minorities.
In absence of elective democracy and free press in the 1970s, the Arab governments under kingdoms or autocratic regimes swallowed the narrative of their all-weather friend Pakistan.
The two alliances, the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), instead of cautioning Pakistan, had extended moral and political support to strengthen “Islamic nationalism,” which provided the base for united Pakistan which was in the spirit of “Muslim Ummah,” while the Pakistan military committed war crimes in Bangladesh.
The discourse of the liberation war which transformed East Pakistan into Bangladesh was not understood by the Middle East leaders and Arab organizations.
Obviously, during the Cold War, the Arabs were left out by the superpowers. From Algeria to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan embraced the Western hegemony of America as their trusted ally.
Bangladesh, while licking the scars of the Liberation War, did not hesitate to connect with the Arab nations and establish diplomatic relations with them, thus, opening a strategic inroad to the Arabs.
Sheikh Mujib’s statesmanship dented the wall created by Pakistan and penetrated deep into the heartland of the Middle East. In July 1972, Iraq was the first Arab country to recognize Bangladesh as an independent state, and gradually all countries accepted the existence of the newly independent country.
First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 6 April 2021
Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad
Tuesday, March 09, 2021
Born for the flag
![]() |
| Photo: MAHMUD HOSSAION OPU |
The story of Salam Sikder and his loyalty to the Bangladesh flag
SALEEM SAMAD
Liberation War veteran Salam Sikder, born in a poor peasant family, left home in early 1971. He told his wife that henceforth, she must take care of their two children.
When filmmaker Kawsar Chowdhury met him in 1997 at Gollamari in Khulna, his eyes were glowing with pride, instilled with the glory of the Liberation War. He was in his early thirties when he joined the Mukti Bahini guerrillas. He and his combatants operated stealthily for months in Khulna and Bagerhat region under Sector 9, commanded by Major Jalil.
The ragtag foot soldiers survived on bare food ration but were defiant against marauding forces. Their objective was one -- to liberate the motherland from the brutal occupation of Pakistan. Salam did not remember how many hit and run operations they conducted in Dacope, Batiaghata, Gollamari, Rampal, and adjoining areas.
On December 16, 1971, heads held high, Salam along with a small unit of foot soldiers, marched into war-ravaged Khulna city. Several dead bodies were strewn all over the city. The flow of the Gollamari canal, a tributary of river Moyur, was blocked by countless corpses in the waterway.
On December 16, in a simple ceremony, the flag of independent Bangladesh was hoisted at a small field on the back of the Gollamari canal. Quickly a flag-stand made of a bamboo pole was erected. A flag was tied to a rope. Who would take the privilege to hoist the flag?
Commander Kamruzzaman Tuku asked Salam Sikder to hoist the flag. He began to cry and said that he was not the right choice when there were other valiant guerrilla fighters.
Finally, all hands joined to raise the flag. It was also decided to build a martyr’s memorial at the same site. The Mukti Bahini commander and others decided that the caretaker would be Salam Sikder and he would hoist the flag at dawn and lower at dusk.
The story does not end here. Till the last day of his life, he raised the flag and lowered it, as demanded by the commander.
He took the honorary job seriously. He lived in a dilapidated thatched house adjacent to the martyr’s memorial. Not a single day, till 1997, had Salam taken a day off. When he did visit neighbours and relatives, he quickly returned before evening to lower the flag.
He never requested his family members to wash the flag. The flag was washed with care as if he was bathing an infant. He lamented that his son often asked why he had spent his entire life for a flag and never took care of the family. He explained that when he left their mother with two sons, he could have been killed in the battlefront.
He appealed to them to seek blessings from the Almighty that their father was alive and said: “I have been born for the flag and I will die for the flag.”
The award-winning Liberation War documentary filmmaker Kawsar Chowdhury in 2004 visited the martyr’s memorial and also met the warrior in fragile health. A brain stroke left him physically challenged and with memory loss.
The following year, the loyal flag caretaker Salam Sikder died -- unfortunately unrecognized for his contribution.
First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 9 March 2021
Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad
Tuesday, December 22, 2020
"How long can Pakistan hold out in the east (Bangladesh)”
A conversation between Henry Kissinger and General Westmoreland about the birth of Bangladesh
Three days after a full-scale war between India and Pakistan in the eastern frontier and Bangladesh-India jointly against Pakistan in the eastern theatre, Henry Kissinger asked how long could the Pakistan troops hold in Bangladesh.
The meeting held in Washington DC, in the morning of December 6, 1971, was attended by senior officials of departments of state, defence, joint chief of staffs, CIA, USAID, and others.
US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, at the onset of the meeting asked Gen Westmoreland: “What is your military assessment? How long can Pakistan hold out in the east” (Bangladesh war zone)?
Gen Westmoreland candidly said up to three weeks. Once the Pakistan Army runs out of supplies, all the troops in East Pakistan [Bangladesh] will become hostage. The officials discussed whether there were any possibilities of Pakistan troop's evacuation. Gen Westmoreland responded in negative.
A senior official of the State Department asked Gen Westmoreland that assuming the Indians took over Bangladesh, how did he think it would happen?
Gen Westmoreland replied, “I think their primary thrust will be to cut off the seaport of Chittagong. This will virtually cut off any possibility of resupply. Then they will move to destroy the Pakistan regular forces, in cooperation with the Mukti Bahini. They will then be faced with the major job of restoring some order to the country. I think there will be a revenge massacre — possibly the greatest in the twentieth century.”
Kissinger asked whether the Indians would withdraw their army once the Pakistan forces were disarmed.
Gen Westmoreland replied that he thought they [Indian] would leave three or four divisions to work with the Mukti Bahini, and pull the remainder back to the West.
The officials expected that the Indians would pull out as quickly as they could. Once the Pakistan forces were disarmed, the Indians would have a friendly population. They could afford to move back to the border areas quickly.
Another official predicted that after the Indian Army had been in Bangladesh for two or three weeks, they would be accepted as a “Hindu army of occupation.”
Kissinger asked: “What will India do with Bangladesh? Will they see it as an independent state or have them negotiate with Islamabad?”
An official responded that India had already recognized Bangladesh as an independent country. Kissinger said then that there was no hope for Pakistan to negotiate with Bangladesh. The objective of the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s government was to force a surrender of the Pakistani troops in Bangladesh within 10 days.
In a telegram from New Delhi on December 6, US Ambassador Kenneth Barnard Keating reported that Indian Foreign Secretary Triloki Nath Kaul had expressed “disappointment, shock and surprise” that the United States had tabled the resolution it did in the UNSC.
On December 5, the Soviet representative on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) vetoed an eight-power draft resolution that called for a ceasefire and mutual withdrawal of forces, as well as intensified efforts to create the conditions necessary for the return of refugees to their homes.
The United States sriously wanted to stick with withdrawal and ceasefire, not a surrender of Pakistan troops. Kissinger assured the Pakistan regime that they were doing the best they could do diplomatically.
The resolution, which was tabled by Argentina, Belgium, Burundi, Italy, Japan, Nicaragua, Sierra-Leone, and Somalia, garnered a vote of 11 to 2 with 2 abstentions but was not adopted because of the negative vote of the Soviet Union (USSR). However, the UN Security Council accepted on December 6 that an impasse had been reached in its deliberations on the conflict in South Asia, and referred the issue to the General Assembly.
An estimated 93,000 Pakistan troops and civilians made an unconditional public surrender in Dhaka on December 16, 1971, which is observed as Victory Day each year.
First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 22 December 2020
Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleemsamad@hotmail.com>; Twitter @saleemsamad
Monday, October 19, 2020
America’s political motives further complicated Bangladesh’s Liberation War
Pakistan’s acceptance of Bangladesh’s independence during the height of the Liberation War in 1971 would have shed more bloodletting in the restive region.
The supposedly brokered ceasefire by China and America would have surely collapsed, as the Mukti Bahini, the East Bengal guerrillas, would not have obeyed the call.
By October, the Pakistani junta had deliberately transferred back to Pakistan the amphibian battle tanks, the newly-installed radar at Dhaka was dismantled, as were the squadron of fighter aircraft, which were brought from China.
For many in Karachi, where the military hardware was unloaded in the port, they understood that it was a matter of weeks. The eastern province was to become an independent country, but it was worried about thousands of soldiers and officers, civil administration, business entrepreneurs, and Pakistan civilians in the eastern province.
Henry Kissinger, the double-edge former US secretary of state, in an interview by Jeffrey Goldberg published in The Atlantic, said talks between America and China would have collapsed if the US had publicly condemned human rights violations and atrocities by the Pakistan army against the people of then East Pakistan.
Months before the violent crackdown Operation Searchlight by the Pakistan military, Pakistan emerged as the interlocutor most acceptable to Beijing and Washington, and exchanges were conducted from Islamabad.
Goldberg’s question was whether the opening to China was worth the sacrifices and deaths experienced in the India-Pakistan Bangladesh crisis, to which Kissinger retorted that Bangladesh demonstrates how this issue has been confused in our public debate. There was never a choice between suffering in Bangladesh and the opening to China.
He did not hesitate to state that Pakistan deployed extreme violence and gross human rights violations when Bangladesh was battling to achieve independence.
“The US diplomats witnessing the Bangladesh tragedy were ignorant of the opening to China. Their descriptions were heartfelt and valid, but we could not respond publicly,” he said.
By the time of the Bangladesh crisis in 1971 -- when Pakistan imposed martial law to crush the territory’s bid for independence -- Nixon felt he owed Pakistan’s military dictator, General Yahya Khan, a debt of gratitude for his government’s role in facilitating Kissinger’s secret trip to China, ignoring reports of Pakistan’s military atrocities against Bangladeshi civilians.
The US actively supported Pakistan, to the extent of violating congressional restrictions on supplying arms to Pakistani troops.
“In November, the Pakistani president agreed with Nixon to grant independence the following March,” Kissinger said.
But the following December, “India, after having made a treaty including military provisions with the Soviet Union, and in order to relieve the strain of refugees, invaded East Pakistan,” he said, adding that the US had to navigate between Soviet pressures, Indian objectives, Chinese suspicions, and Pakistani nationalism.
“By March 1972 -- within less than a year of the commencement of the crisis -- Bangladesh was independent; the India-Pakistan War ended, and the opening to China completed at a summit in Beijing in February 1972,” said Kissinger.
In his book World Order, Kissinger describes India as “a fulcrum of twenty first century order: An indispensable element, based on its geography, resources, and tradition of sophisticated leadership, in the strategic and ideological evolution of the regions and the concepts of order at whose intersection it stands.”
But in 1971, when Pakistan’s erstwhile eastern wing fought to become Bangladesh, Kissinger made a U-Turn and scorned India as “a Soviet stooge, supported with Soviet arms” over its support for Bangladesh independence.
First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 19 October 2020
Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad
Monday, December 16, 2019
Bangladesh declared war against India on Dec 3
![]() |
| Photo: Courtesy Anwar Hossain Foundation |
And how a dream became reality
First Published in the Dhaka Tribune 16 December 2019
Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, also recipient of Ashoka Fellow and Hellman-Hammett Award.
Monday, April 03, 2017
Why Pakistan skipped IPU Assembly
The last minute pull-out of 10-member delegation led by Pakistan national assembly speaker Ayaz Sadiq was due to participate in the IPU assembly in Dhaka. Further to slay the slain, Pakistan took the issue of Bangladesh observing "Genocide Day" on March 25 to memorialize genocide of three million people and sexual abuse of 400,000 women during the Liberation War in 1971.
Sadiq's statement was not a surprise Bangladesh government. He said the Pakistan national assembly members noted with disappointment the actions and "negative public statements" coming out of Bangladesh despite Pakistan's "restraint and overtures" to the country.
The bilateral relation between the two countries has been in roller-coaster since the independence of Bangladesh and surrender of Pakistan armed forces in eastern front in December 1971.
The boycott of the IPU conference is another sign of strain in Bangladesh-Pakistan ties. The relationship further plummeted when Pakistan has officially protested the sentencing and hanging of Jamaat-e-Islami leaders for war crimes committed during the bloody war in 1971.
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's government strongly reacted to Pakistan's reactions in regard of the judicial verdicts, which her administration stated tantamount to meddling in internal affairs of Bangladesh and also asked Islamabad to apologize for atrocities committed by marauding Pakistan army during the Liberation War.
However, diplomatic relations between two countries enjoyed best of ties during the two military regimes of General Ziaur Rahman (1975-1981) and General HM Ershad (1982-1990). The bilateral relations between Bangladesh and Pakistan had risen and shined during the regimes of Begum Khaleda Zia (1991-1996 and 2001-2005), when dreaded Pakistan spy agency ISI was given legitimacy for covert operation against India.
ISI operatives in a bid to destabilize the north-eastern states, had provided weapons, training and helped money laundering of funds to run the separatist groups, who were engaged in violent actions against the Indian authority. The Pakistan spy agency was also active in raising militant groups from among the Rohingya Muslims to wage war against Myanmar for a separate state.
Since Sheikh Hasina came to power in 2009, her government was able to neutralize the ISI operations in Bangladesh and all the separatist leaders of Indian north-east were deported to India. Once the Pakistan's covert operations were blocked and regular seizure counterfeit Indian currency smuggled into India, Pakistan began tirade against Bangladesh.
Bangladesh also with other South Asian countries including India, Afghanistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Maldives and Bhutan pulled out of the 19th SAARC Summit to be hosted by Pakistan in November 2016, citing incitement in terrorism in the region.
This episode further angered Islamabad and blamed Dhaka taking cue from New Delhi and adopts an anti-Pakistan posture, writes an editorial in a Pakistan newspaper published on April 1.
Speaker Ayaz Sadiq, quoted in an influential newspaper "Aaj News" expressed grief that "all such dedicated efforts, unfortunately, fell in vain and Pakistan was time and again targeted and maligned…. It was, therefore, decided, with a heavy heart, not to undertake a visit to Bangladesh at this time."







