Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 3:28am

1971 is the most distressing moment of Pakistan’s history. I agree with the notion that the circumstances and the way West treated East was a big reason to estrange the bengalis from the rest of Pakistan. The years leading to the tragedy can we pin the blame only on the military alone and bail out the politicians of that time?

Politicians cannot completely wash their hands of everything completely:

When ever we talk about 1971 debacle or the operation in Balochistan (1972-1978) we’d have to see the role of civilian leadership present at the time
Some politicians supported the dictatorships during Zia and Musharraf’s time
Now questions will be asked from Zardari regarding the operation carried out in Balochistan, missing persons and drone attacks.

While being in power they need to take full control and responsibility of the situation. The time is gone when the rulers could take credit of all good things and put the blame of the failures on others.

Anwer_Pasha · March 23, 2012, 3:37am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

People who killed Liaqat Ali in 52 , The man who became minister in uniform .people who ruled from 58 to 71 are only responsible .
About Balochistan
How can you stop these intermediate pass intellectuals .There are puppets like Imran Khan ready
to work ...............................

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 3:38am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

Bhutto was part of that government, FYI.

Anwer_Pasha · March 23, 2012, 3:48am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

No , Bhutto was not part of that government , He tried to work for Pakistan during 71 war as nominated foreign minister only .
If some emergency work is done for the country ,you can not count it part of the government .

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 3:51am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

Ok this was what I wanted to hear

kakaballi · March 23, 2012, 4:43am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

This says it all.

It is more than established that Bhutto incited and supported military action in East Pakistan. His own lust for power was not by any way less than those generals. Out of two the devils eating up our country, you always remember only one.

Come back to the topic please.

Anwer_Pasha · March 23, 2012, 5:27am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

This is not true as it is not true about everything . Yahya Khan didn't want this all and tried to play with both sides .

kakaballi · March 23, 2012, 5:37am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

^ The only truth is that Bhutto was a saint and Hamood-ur-Rehman commission report was not made public for his spiritual reasons. The national assembly never convened and only generals wanted that? Anyways, that all can be discussed in another place.

Back to topic please.

Anwer_Pasha · March 23, 2012, 6:13am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

Hamood ur rehman commission report has been published and that was not made public only due to reputation of army . Perhaps you have read that .
Back to topic please.

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 8:46am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

Bhutto remained part of the government of ayub (read establishment) from 1958 to 65-66 as commerce and foreign minister. In 1967 I think he formed people's party, after the elections mujib won the majority in east Pakistan but Bhutto was not willing to cede power to him. On 16th December Pakistan was dismembered what was Bhutto doing in the general assembly on 15th of December 1971, and on what capacity was he representing Pakistan there?

The elections were held in Dec 1970, in which AL won 160 seats (in East Pakistan) and PPP won 81 seats (West Pakistan). The national assembly session was called on March 3, 1971 but Bhutto refused to participate in the session due to Mujeeb's 6 points. The military and political parties in Pakistan thought that the 6 points were leading towards independence of East Pakistan. Bhutto threatened to break the legs of the members who attended that session. On March 1, 1971 Yahya postponed the assembly session indefinitely spirally the country out of control. The Bangladeshis believe that Bhutto and Yahya were colluding with each other.

Anyways what ever the case in the end the military (Yahya Khan) and politicians of that time (Bhutto and Mujeeb) were all responsible for what followed.

superman85 · March 23, 2012, 9:47am

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

It’s painful enough we are talking about all that went on to break Pakistan on 23rd March, of all days.

NaMaan · March 23, 2012, 11:23am

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

It says it all

ninja_hattori · March 23, 2012, 11:35am

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

can you explain to whom addressing as suwar ke bachche?

NaMaan · March 23, 2012, 11:51am

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

^^ App ka Bangladeshi bahi :)

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 11:51am

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

What's the context of this speech

Afat · March 23, 2012, 12:15pm

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

I am confounded

Look this is the list of PM's Pakistan all

1- Liaquat Ali Khan (1896–1951) 14 August 1947 16 October 1951

2- Sir Khawaja Nazimuddin (1894–1964) 17 October 1951 17 April 1953

3- Muhammad Ali Bogra (1909–1963) 17 April 1953 12 August 1955

4- Chaudhry Muhammad Ali (1905–1980) 12 August 1955 12 September 1956

5- Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy (1892–1963) 12 September 1956 17 October 1957

6- Ibrahim Ismail Chundrigar (1898–1968) 17 October 1957 16 December 1957

7- Sir Feroz Khan Noon (1893–1970) 16 December 1957 7 October 1958

Post Abolished (7 October 1958-7 December 1971)

8- Nurul Amin (1893–1974) 7 December 1971 20 December 1971

Post Abolished (20 December 1971-14 August 1973)

9- Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (1928–1979) 14 August 1973 5 July 1977

Post Abolished (5 July 1977-24 March 1985)

10- Muhammad Khan Junejo (1932–1993) 24 March 1985 29 May 1988

Post Abolished (29 May 1988-2 December 1988)

11- Benazir Bhutto (1953–2007) 2 December 1988 6 August 1990

11A- Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi (1931–2009 ) 6 August 1990 6 November 1990 Caretaker

12- Nawaz Sharif (1949– ) 6 November 1990 18 April 1993

12A- Balakh Sher Mazari (1928– ) 18 April 1993 26 May 1993 Caretaker

(12)- Nawaz Sharif (1949– ) 26 May 1993 18 July 1993

12B- Moeenuddin Ahmad Qureshi (1930– ) 18 July 1993 19 October 1993 Caretaker

(11)- Benazir Bhutto (1953–2007) 19 October 1993 5 November 1996

11B- Malik Meraj Khalid (1916–2003) 5 November 1996 17 February 1997 Caretaker

(12)- Nawaz Sharif (1949– ) 17 February 1997 12 October 1999

Post Abolished (12 October 1999-21 November 2002)

13- Zafarullah Khan Jamali (1944– ) 21 November 2002 26 June 2004

14- Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain (1946– ) 30 June 2004 20 August 2004

15- Shaukat Aziz (1949– ) 20 August 2004 16 November 2007

15A- Muhammad Mian Soomro (1950– ) 16 November 2007 25 March 2008

16- Yousaf Raza Gillani (1952– ) 25 March 2008--- Incumbent

in the First 8 , as many as 5 belonged to Bengal ...

also I have with me the statistics of quota system ,accordingly the first ever Quota System was introduced in Sep 47 or 48 , it has 42-40% Quota for Bengal.....

so what really went wrong.....!!

Silaaj · March 23, 2012, 12:28pm

Re: PTI Quetta Jalsa, another challenge

Oh...so THATS what it was! It makes sense now that you have cleared it up.

And oh, thank you for maintaining your consistency of bringing in Imran Khan into this thread as well.

Finally, martial law is a curse, and anyone who imposes it is a jerk. Can you name all the martial law administrators of Pakistan?(in reverse alphabetical order please).

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 12:55pm

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

The six points that Mujeeb had proposed, I am sure all of them could not have been accepted but some compromise could have reached. It seems as if all the concerned parties didnt budge from their positions hence resulting in the catastrophe. The National assembly’s meeting was called in Dhaka on Mar 03, 1971. This is an excerpt of Bhutto’s speech dated Feb 22, 1971.

According to this speech Bhutto was willing to talk about the 6 points in 1965-66, and then he says that he is not going to Dhaka for the national assembly meeting and thirdly he has also expressed reservations on the six points that they could lead to division of the country. If he was interested in debate on the six points how many meetings did he have with Mujeeb during the six years 1965-1971, it seems he tried to play politics on this matter too by asking Mujeeb for a public debate.

Bhutto

[TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]** I have often said in my speeches, ever since the Six Points were presented at the Lahore national conference of opposition parties in 196-5 that these Points should be debated: but even at the National Confer*ence itself leaders from West Pakistan did not debate them. They rejected any political dialogue on the Six Points. On my part I had even advised Ayub Khan’s Government to consider all points; twenty-two, eleven or six, and to hold political talks.’ I had told them that any delay in considering these questions will further complicate the problem. I threw a challenge to Mujib for a public debate.** After I left the Government, I addressed the students of the Dacca Engineering Institute. I analyzed and criticized the Six Points. I said that we were ready to talk on these Points, But since the press was controlled by the Government—and it still is—it twisted and blew up my statement saying that I was taking a contradictory stand. When I came back from East Pakistan and addressed a public meeting in Sialkot, the people asked me what I had said in Dacca. I told them and I reaffirm that a time is coming when we will have to hold talks on the Six Points. The Six Points are the result of the exploitation of the people of East Pakistan. It would have been better if these Points had been debated when they were first raised.

[/TD]
[/TR]

[/TD]
[/TR]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]**I will tell you tomorrow why we decided not to go to Dacca.

**
I know some people are demanding that we should explain our stand in the National Assembly in accordance with established democratic principles. True, a constitution is framed after debate and discussion in the Assembly, but we are faced with a peculiar situation. It would have been a different mailer were a Constituent Assembly already in existence. Since the Awami League calls the Six Points the basis of the constitution, no room is left for any compromise whatsoever on that stand. On top of it, a time limit of 120 days has been fixed for constitution-making. It would not be helpful if a deadlock was created in the Assembly on account of these two factors. Is it not better not to hold the National Assembly session until these problems are resolved outside the Assembly?

[/TD]
[/TR]

[/TD]
[/TR]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]We want a constitution, not a deadlock. We would have participated in the framing of the constitution had it not been already written on the basis of Six Points and had there been no limit of 120 days. **It would have been another matter if this one were the first Constituent Assembly. But the mutual mistrust of the past 23 years coupled with the atmosphere in which the yearlong electioneering was conducted has generated extremism. It has led to the Playing up of the Six Points. We won the elections on the basis of a new economic system and an independent foreign policy. They had the Six Points as their prime problem while economic deterioration and independent foreign Policy were the issues we raised. If we are to serve our country, our nation and our religion, we will have to strike off the shackles of exploitation. The success of the People’s Party here and the Awami League there has been made possible by the people. **Had we opposed the Six Points at the time of elec*tions, there would have been a confrontation and the country would have gone to pieces.

[/TD]
[/TR]

[/TD]
[/TR]

Ali_Syed · March 23, 2012, 1:11pm

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

His speech on Feb 28, 1971.

Bhutto

[TABLE]

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]**I propose two alternatives to resolve the present crisis—postponement of the National Assembly session or removal of the 120 day time limit for the Assembly to frame a constitution.

**
**If either of these alternatives is accepted, I shall go to Dacca tomorrow to meet Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to resolve the pre-session deadlock.

**
**If the session of the Assembly is held on March 3, as scheduled without PPP’s participation, I shall launch a popular agitation from one end of West Pakistan to the other. If the elections to women’s seats take place on March 2 there will be a general strike from Peshawar to Karachi. I have never opposed the Six Points, although the programme was not acceptable to me personally. However, we narrowed down our disagreement to foreign trade. and foreign aid which cannot be entrusted to the provincial governments.

**
Both the subjects are concomitants of foreign affairs and should be in the charge of the Federal Government if the Centre is to be effective. Agreement can be arrived at on inter-wing currency arrangements and on taxation power but we cannot give in on foreign trade and aid.

I refute the allegation leveled by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman that I have been conspiring to create impediments in the transfer of power. This allega*tion is a lie. It is unimaginable that I could be in league with bureaucrats or the capitalists or the regime, or any foreign power, because all of them have shown consistent hostility to the People’s Party.

Since January last year when political activity was revived my party and I never criticised or condemned Six Points. I did not make it a personal issue and have attributed no motives to the leader of the Awami League as other politicians from West Pakistan have done.

The Six Points were made known by Sheikh Mujib at the then opposition parties’ national convention in Lahore in 1966 for the first time. The leaders who participated in that convention had rejected them outright.

As Foreign Minister I had advised President Ayub Khan to tackle Six Points on the political level as they contained the seeds for serious differ*ences between the two wings of the country. I had urged him to find a solution acceptable to East Pakistan. But, he ignored my advice and, instead of using political language, threatened to use the “language of weapons.”

I tried to enter into a political dialogue with the Awami League while agreeing with it that elimination of exploitation was a common objective.

[/TD]
[/TR]

[/TD]
[/TR]

East Pakistani leaders wanted a federal constitution for the country and the PPP agreed to it. But in that case the federal constitution must be endorsed by each federating unit.
It is being suggested that the PPP should accept the normal democratic procedure and debate the constitution on the floor of the House. But it should not be forgotten that an extraordinary situation has arisen because the Awami League has already drafted a Six Point constitution and wants the Assembly to rubber-stamp it. And at the same time a 120 day limit has been imposed for the framing of the constitution.** I have never rejected Six Points because I wanted to discuss them with the Awami League. I have refrained from indulging in personal attacks as other leaders in West Pakistan have not done. It is unfortunate that the leaders of East Pakistan have leveled allegations against me.** I had suggested a political dialogue on the Six Points as I wanted to avoid a deadlock in the National Assembly because if it occurred the country would face an extremely grave crisis.

superman85 · March 23, 2012, 1:13pm

Re: Responsibility for 1971 tragedy

I wonder who said refused to accept an Awami League government and famously promised to “break the legs” of any elected PPP member who dared to attend the inaugural session of the National Assembly. For all the good work he did, you just need one brain dead moment from Bhutto to erase it all.

I don’t care what or how, and even though it happened 14 years before I was born, whenever I think about this tragedy, it feels like a room in my house just crashed.