Pakistani Army General A. A. K. Niazi (right) signs the instrument of surrender before Indian Army General J. S. Aurora on December 16, 1971, in Dhaka (picture courtesy: unknown)
In the following two articles, a prominent Pakistani diplomat and a Pakistani blogger look at the unprecedented political developments and the indifference of Pakistani elite that led to the secession of East Pakistan in 1971. Pakistan was ruled mainly by the elite from the West Pakistan part of the country until then. However, an armed movement, supported by the Indian Army, led to East Pakistan seceding and becoming Bangladesh, with the Pakistani Army surrendering in Dhaka on December 16, 1971.
There were many reasons for the fall of Dhaka, including sustained discrimination against the Bengali-speaking people of East Pakistan by the ruling elite, a major cyclone in that region in 1970, as well as denial of their right to form the government of Pakistan following the 1970 elections. In the elections, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto won 82 of 138 parliamentary seats available in West Pakistan and none in East Pakistan. However, it was the Awami League party of Sheikh Mujibur Rehman which won the majority in the Pakistani parliament by virtue of winning 162 of the 169 seats in East Pakistan, i.e. more than the 82 seats won by PPP. Rehman was not allowed to form the Pakistani government and went on to lead a secessionist movement.
In his blog posting titled, "Man Behind the Fall of Dhaka," Tanzeel Ahmad, a Karachi-based columnist and marketing professional, blamed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto for the secession of East Pakistan. He also accused Bhutto of fostering an Islamist policy in the country, including declaring Ahmadi Muslims as non-Muslims. In his article, titled "Reminiscing About December 16," former Pakistani diplomat Tayyab Siddiqui argued that it was the indifference of the Pakistani elite towards the Bengali-speaking people that led to the independence of Bangladesh. Excerpts from both the write-ups are given below.
"[Bhutto's] Confusing Steps of Implementing Islamic Socialism by Declaring Friday as Public Holiday were the Worst Steps Taken by Any Ruler in the History of Pakistan"
Following are excerpts from Tanzeel Ahmad's blog posting:[1]
"While going through the causes of the cessation of East Pakistan [in 1971]... I realized that Hitler was right when he said 'the bigger the lie, more people will believe it.' Similar 'bigger lies' have been told by our previous governments, especially those led by PPP [Pakistan People's Party of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto] since 1971. On 16th December 2010, 39 years after the creation of Bangladesh, let us [reflect on] how our governments in the past have told us a great lie about... [such] political occurrences.
"As per the details available in different form in electronic and print media, the Hamoodur Rehman Commission Report [into the causes of East Pakistan's secession] cites that incompetence, moral degeneration, and political conspiracies were the major reasons for the 1971 debacle. It was maintained in the report that the defeat suffered was not a result of military factors alone, but had been brought about as the cumulative result of political developments that took place between 1947 and 1971.
"Looking at the other side of the story, I find that the government then was actually the real culprit. It was Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's party which got 82 of the 138 seats allocated to the four provinces in West Pakistan but neither of them... [was] in East Pakistan. [In East Pakistan, the Awami League won 167 of 169 seats, claiming to form the Pakistani government.] Setting aside the slogan raised by him 'Idher ham udher tum,' [i.e. 'We on this side, you on the other'] he even threatened the members of the Assembly from West Pakistan that he would 'break their legs' if they attended... [the] inaugural session [of the Pakistani parliament] in Dhaka... and if they insisted on attending they must buy a one-way ticket.
"Such step-motherly treatment further increased the grievances of the people of East Pakistan, and a justified freedom movement emerged from their side. However, at that time [the] Pakistani military had no other option but to suppress the movement in order to save the territory of Pakistan, while Bhutto on the other hand kept misguiding [President] Yahya Khan [in order to prevent Awami League leader Sheikh Mujibur Rehman from forming the government], that ended up on breaking the nation...
SUPPORT OUR WORK
"[Bhutto was] perceived as a 'hero' amongst certain sections of Pakistanis for his political moves, which on the contrary proved to be nonsensical and led the country into a chaotic [situation]. His senseless steps of nationalization of the economy and confusing steps of implementing Islamic socialism by declaring Friday as public holiday were the worst steps taken by any ruler in the history of Pakistan. In order to appease religious groups, he got Ahmadis declared as non-Muslims, [which] triggered an unending violent movement against a peaceful and progressive section of society. The brunt of this decision is still... felt, and fatally alienated the community in their own nation. To remain in power Bhutto took decisions which caused irrevocable damage to the social and political structure of the country."
"The Islamic State [of Pakistan] was not Able to Integrate... with the Prevailing Ethnic and Cultural Differences which became the Root Cause of this Debacle"
"We also must not ignore the role of [Pakistan's founder M. A.] Jinnah in creating the language controversy in East Pakistan [by arguing] that Urdu was to be the common language for Pakistan. This proved highly controversial, since Urdu was a language that was only spoken in the West by Mohajirs [who came from India] and in the East by Biharis [Urdu-speaking immigrants from India]. The majority groups in West Pakistan spoke Punjabi, while the Bengali language was spoken by the vast majority of East Pakistanis. The Islamic state [of Pakistan] was not able to integrate... with the prevailing ethnic and cultural differences which became the root cause of this debacle.
"The language controversy eventually reached an extreme which led East Pakistan to revolt, while the other part of Pakistan remained calm even though Punjabi was spoken by the majority groups of West Pakistan. Several civilians, including students, lost their lives in a police crackdown on 21st February 1952 [as the Bengali-speaking students were protesting against the declaration of Urdu as Pakistan's national language]. The day is revered in Bangladesh and in West Bengal [a state of India] as the Language Martyrs' Day.
"In my opinion, the policies the Pakistani establishment set for East Pakistan were indeed biased and based on self-interest; we never took the people of East Pakistan as our own since day one, and as a result both the countries parted their ways. It's time to stop the selective blame-game and hold responsible the politicians whose inability to lead this nation... worked as catalyst to the freedom movement in East Pakistan..."
"[Before the Secession of East Pakistan] Pakistan Never had Such a Pariah Status in the International Community"
Following are excerpts from Tayyab Siddiqui's article:[2]
"The disaster that struck Pakistan on December 16, 1971 has few precedents in the history of nations. But whereas a national tragedy of such magnitude should be a source of eternal shame, such feelings have totally escaped the Pakistani intelligentsia and elite. Before this, Pakistan never had such a pariah status in the international community. At the time, the news of the 'genocide' of Bengalis was making headlines in international media. President Yahya Khan's interview with [the] French daily Le Figaro in October 1971 appeared with an apology from the chief editor 'for the violence of the language of the president.'
"It was a cold morning on December 17, 1971 [a day after Fall of Dhaka]. When I entered the Pakistani Embassy in Colombo, as a young ambassador, I saw hundreds of Sri Lankans sitting on the lawns. The high commissioner, in a brusque official tone, asked me to meet them. The 500 or so Muslims were sobbing and crying over the Dhaka surrender.
"I sat for a while, consoling them. When I went back to the high commissioner, he was entertaining another Pakistani diplomat en route to his posting in Kuala Lumpur, [Malaysia]. The commissioner asked me to bring him the gradation list of the Foreign Office to ascertain his seniority after the exodus of the Bengali officers. No expression of grief or loss. The tragedy was seen as holding promise of quick upward mobility in the service, following the departure of Bengali diplomats."
"The Fact is That West Pakistani Leaders Regarded East Pakistan as A Millstone in the Neck of the Federation"
"This was not the only instance of our elite's indifference. A retired general had planned a big bash to celebrate his daughter's birthday on December 16. After the news of the fall of Dhaka [that day], some officers meekly suggested that the celebration was improper but were chastised by the ambassador for their impudence.
"The fact is that West Pakistani leaders regarded East Pakistan as a millstone in the neck of the federation. The following paragraph from former Chief Justice of Pakistan Muhammad Munir's book, From Jinnah to Zia (Vanguard 1980), is instructive: 'When I joined Ayub's Cabinet… every day was spent listening to long speeches of East Pakistan members of exploitation of East Pakistan…. None of the ministers or members of the Assembly, whether from East Pakistan or West Pakistan, rose to rebut these allegations. I spoke to Ayub… and asked him whether it would not be better… to ask East Pakistan to take their affairs in their own hands. He suggested that I should talk about it to some influential leader from East Pakistan. One day while I was talking to Mr. Ramizuddin who had been a minister in… East Pakistan I broached the matter…. He said, look here we are the majority province and it is for the minority province to secede because we are Pakistan.'
"The matter ended there and complaints in the Assembly continued as before. Readers can judge for themselves who wanted separation and who wanted secession."
Endnotes:
[1] www.tanzeel.wordpress.com (Pakistan), December 16, 2010. The text of the blog has been lightly edited for clarity.
[2] The Express Tribune (Pakistan), December 16, 2010.
