The separation of East Pakistan

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

ahhhh…So what is your final conclusion??

Have you already concluded that West Pakistan was not responsible due to your proven philosophy of “stuffs like this do happen in war”??

btw…although I am not sure…was this “war” started since 1947 and lasted till almost 25 years???..Were Pakitsani Army not suppressing Bangladeshis since the day one??

Or do you mean to say…all atrocities were committed only in 1971..when India intervened and “War” was declared…so..so Pakitsani army just killed Bangladeshis because they were knowing..“things like this happen in war”:mad:

Before 1971 west Pakitsani army was treating Bangladeshis like their own Punjabi relatives???

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

Stuff like an army having undisciplined soldiers happen during every war. They are trained to be like that. Killing is part of war, as is brutal killing. What goes over your head constantly is that Pakistan Army has/had some undisciplined elements, the Bengali Muktihi Bahini had some, every Army has some. Systematic torture and killing is something different though, and this is the difference between what happened in Bangladesh by the Pakistan army and what is currently happening in Kashmir by the Indian army.

The Bangladeshis were not suppressed politically or economically between 1947 and 1971. If you want to discuss this, feel free, I have been through this, and always give concrete examples that prove East Pakistan was not neglected by any West Pakistan based government. In fact West Pakistan based governments were run by Bengalis for some years!

First you refer to brutal killings and these were taken to mean atrocities. Now you change and say everything since 1947. Make your mind up and stick. And the answer is above.

In fact West Pakistani Army was controlled by Bengalis for many years in the decade of the fifties when the likes of Iskendar Mirza and Dogra (both Bengalis) were ruling Pakistan. Bangladeshis or wherever in Pakistan were treated no differently to how India treats much of its citizens under the trickle down system, cases like Orissa etc. In fact, East Pakistan was treated considerably better than most Indian states were treated by their central government.

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

Nice tidyup job. Stick to the topic, else the heavies will move in (I mean literally heavy in this case)

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

I’ll go through the elements of this supposed “discrimination” one by one as far as possible. Here is a table for education statistics in West Pakistan and East Pakistan from Partition up till 1971.

Click the table, enlarge it.

From the first row. East Pak had 30,000 primary schools in 1947, West Pak had just 8,000 schools, each having 60-70 students in them. Now that is REAL discrimination that existed under colonial rule in a single country.

Max no. of student in East Pak primary school in 1947 = 30,000 * 68 = 2,040,000
Max no. of student in West Pak primary school in 1947 = 8,000 * 64 = 512,000

So in 1947, East Pakistan had 4 times as much primary schol educational facilities as West Pakistan. Very discriminating. What’s the solution? Try and get equal education for everyone in post Partition Pakistan.


From the first row again. East Pak had 28,000 primary schools in 1971, West Pak had 43,000. However, now each school size of East Pak increased to 165 students/school, but West Pak schools had just over half this figure at 90 students /school.

Max no. of student in East Pak primary school in 1971 = 28,000 * 165 = 4,620,000
Max no. of student in West Pak primary school in 1971 = 43,000 * 90 = 3,870,000

So in 1971, East Pakistan and West Pakistan had nearly equal amounts of primary school education facilities for their populations. What is so discriminatory about this. And yes, West Pakistan would have needed more governmental money spent on it to get this educational parity across the country.


Secondary school educational facilities again by 1971 were nearly the same in both east and west Pak.

So what does this mean. It means that under colonial rule, West Pakistan was underdeveloped (primary school education..which is required before secondary school education and is more important in many ways), but when Pakistan achieved its independence, the Pakistani government tried to achieve educational equality in both East and West wings, which would of course require governmental money (since schools are not private enterprise).

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

Why not East & West Bengal(and parts of Assam/Orissa & Bihar) join together & form a greater Bengal.... :)

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

i don't know about pakistan
but india will be united always

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

At least for a forseeable future fo some 200 years?

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

It is heartening to note how calmly you overlook the massacres, rape, and looting committed by the Pakistan Army, the humiliating surrender of the Army to India, the 50,000 POWs, the separation of Jinnah’s Pakistan, the Muslims killing other Muslims and proving that Islam is not enough to sustain a nation. But if roadrunner is happy, then I guess we all should rejoice that we lost the 1971 war! We should start celebrating that day is "The Day India saved us from having to live in the same country as Bingos".

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

Nothing of substance in your post. Just a lack of a point leads you to be so blatantly one sided (and perhaps a bit of Bengali ancestry). Pakistan Army had undisciplined elements like I mentioned, and so did the Muktihi Bahini who in fact slaughtered thousands of Biharis. The evidence is presented here even. On the subject of rape, there's absolutely no evidence for it (just one armchair feminist who mentions the word penis on every page of her book which she has a vested interest to sell). The report I mentioned given was given to a panel of academic experts. It quotes

"(viii) **No rape of women by Pakistan army found in the specific case studies: In all of the incidents involving the Pakistan army in the case studies, the armed forces were found not to have raped women. While this cannot be extrapolated beyond the few specific incidents in this study, it is significant, as in the popular narrative the allegation of rape is often clubbed together with allegation of killing. Rape allegations were made in prior verbal discussions in some cases and in a published work on one of the incidents. However, Bengali eyewitnesses, participants and survivors of the incidents testified to the violence and killings, but also testified that no rape had taken place in these cases. While rape is known to occur in all situations of war, charges and counter-charges on rape form a particularly contentious issue in this conflict. The absence of this particular form of violence in these instances underlines the care that needs to be taken to distinguish between circumstances in which rape may have taken place from those in which it did not."

The "looting" of Bangladesh is just a blatant lie. I've covered this partly with the education thing, I can cover it for other economic aspects also. What was also a lie was the propaganda that had it not been for West Pakistan, East Pakistan would be the richest country in the world!

Do you honestly care about the surrender to the Indian Army? All your posts are anti Pakistan. You should be jumping up and down with joy at this. The only reason Pakistan surrendered to the Indian Army was because half their population and Army deserted them in their hour of need and sided with Bharat. Else Bharat would have had no chance like in '65 or the Western sector during that one.

Even though Jinnah did some great things (like create Pakistan), he was not infallible. Jinnah's vision of Pakistan was of one language, Urdu, by 1954, the leadership had made Bengali an official language of Pakistan, even though it was Jinnah that had gone to East Pakistan and told them directly, Bengali would not be made an official language to which they agreed to at the time.

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

What about these roadrunner.
http://1971.uttorshuri.net/
** “HOW DACCA PAID FOR A ‘UNITED’ PAKISTAN”**

“At another hall, reportedly, soldiers buried the dead in a hastily dug mass grave which was then bull-dozed over by tanks. People living near the university were caught in the fire too, and 200 yards of shanty houses running alongside a railway line were destroyed.”

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

The site is just one of many like those that used to claim Jessore massacre was committed by Pakistan Army. These events have been proven to be false. In fact just a quick glance at that page mentions about Bangladeshi intellectuals. This is what has been discovered about who killed these people.

*Many Bangladeshis hold Major General Rao Farman Ali of the Pakistan army responsible for this hit-squad style execution of Bengali professionals, at least in part because a list of intellectuals in his handwriting was found after the war. A direct link to the army is hard to establish, however, as all the eyewitness accounts by relatives describe the victims as being picked up by Bengali members of “Al Badr”. Aleem Chowdhury’s family holds Moulana Mannan responsible for his killing.36 **The account of the only known survivor of the Rayerbazar killings also speaks of only Bengalis as the captors and killers of fellow Bengali professionals on the eve of the creation of Bangladesh.**37 *
*http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2005&leaf=10&filename=9223&filetype=html *

As for the excesses committed by Pakistan Army, noone can claim the moral high ground, least of all India that undertook aggression into the internal affairs of a foreign country, aside from detaining 90,000 prisoners illegally, and maltreating them.

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

roadrunner, u have one bongali and that too on indian side saying that Jessore might not be perpetrated by pakistanies. But there are host of other sites saying that, it is not the case. It all depends on whom u believe. This lady is digging up facts or fiction after 35 years. Many people have had a very bad experience in Bangladesh,and their opinions are now clouded because of that. The majority of report during 1971 was in favour of bangladesh and against Pakistan.
Besides, I want to ask you a question, why do u think bangladesh(east pakistan) voted overwhelming for Mujibur Rahman.

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

Very simple answer. All these sites are either Bangladeshi or Indian that suggest anti Pakistan stuff, OR people with vested interests in promoting one or other side of the war. Pakistanis generally dont seem so bothered or interested in Bangladesh or India, but India and Bangladesh seem intent on brainwashing their own people into believing their version of '71 because without this version there is no legtimacy to the war on their parts.

But I'll disagree with you that the majority of experts feel the way you think. As I said before, every academic expert on the 1971 war that attended the **South Asia in Crisis: United States Policy, 1961-1972 June 28-29, 2005 Loy Henderson Auditorium **meeting/conference above that agreed with what was said, and agreed with the article I have posted. Aside from this, the reports mentioned above are the only systematic analysis done of the 1971 war. All the other reports were from 1971 itself and most of this was Indian and Bangladeshi propaganda.

[quote]

Besides, I want to ask you a question, why do u think bangladesh(east pakistan) voted overwhelming for Mujibur Rahman.
[/quote]

Very simple answer again. Nationalistic sentiment was deliberately stoked by the Awami League in order to grab power in the upcoming elections. One example of how this was done was by politicizing the cyclone incident that occurred at the time. This was one factor. There are other though. For example, East Pakistan/Bangladesh voted overwhelmingly to leave India during Partition and join with Pakistan.

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

Roadrunner,

"As for the excesses committed by Pakistan Army, noone can claim the moral high ground, least of all India that undertook aggression into the internal affairs of a foreign country, aside from detaining 90,000 prisoners illegally, and maltreating them"

I don't know wheather you were born in that era or not but what you said is incorrect. 95000 were not detained illigally they were p.o.w, when Pakistani general surrendered before Indian general. These soldiers were inlvolved in genocide, rape, looting state bank and destroying infrastructure. Read 'Justice Hamoodur-Rehaman's Commission Report.

When Mujib won the election of 1970, dictator of the time did not hand over power to elected majority and statred army action. Result, breakup of Pakistan when majority Pakistanis did not want to become part of Pakistan. India only took advantage of the situation solely created by Pakistani Army. Don't distort the facts.

FARID

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

1) The Hamoudor Rehman Commission Report did not say the soldiers were involved in genocide, or rape or looting or destroying infrastructure. At no point does it mention genocide, in fact Mr Indian. The Report mentions isolated instances of excesses by individual soldiers which are known to happen in any war,** but it does not mention that these instances were "systematic" or were commonplace.** And it definitely does not mention genocide.

2) The war was over in December, 1971. The POWs were not returned for years after the war was over. There was even a stamp from 1973 about these POWs that were illegally detained in India at the time.

[quote]

When Mujib won the election of 1970, dictator of the time did not hand over power to elected majority and statred army action. Result, breakup of Pakistan when majority Pakistanis did not want to become part of Pakistan. India only took advantage of the situation solely created by Pakistani Army. Don't distort the facts.

[/quote]

This has been discussed above.

1) Mujib's manifesto of 6 points was in fact illegal according to the Legal Framework Order. If the LFO was illegal because Yahya Khan promulgated it, then so was the election since Yahya Khan was the driving force behind that two (and so was Mujib's victory).

2) The most important point was that the West Pakistani President was happy to let Mujib lead the country, provided he did not weaken the Federation by granting provincial autonomy as he was suggesting. His manifesto was confused. You tell me how you can have a country, with seperate provinces that have their own independent economies along with the same foreign policies?

Re: The separation of East Pakistan

road runner,

Read it below. This was taken from an old thread, discussed zillions of times. Are you patroit paki like Wasi Zafar with big arm?

"1971 Bangladesh atrocities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaYour continued
donations keep Wikipedia running!
1971 Bangladesh atrocities
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
During the Bangladesh War of 1971, widespread atrocities were committed against
the Bengali population of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), at a level that within
Bangladesh, ‘genocide’ is the term that is still used to describe the event in
almost every major publication and newspaper [1] [2]. A smaller number of
non-Bengali citizens were also killed in clashes with the Mukti Bahini. The
actual extent of the atrocities committed is not clearly known, and opinions
vary, as the next section discusses. However, there is little doubt that
numerous civilians were tortured and killed during the war. A large section of
the intellectual community of Bangladesh was murdered mostly by the Al-Shams and
Al-Badr forces, at the instruction of the Pakistan army[3]. There are many mass
graves in Bangladesh, and newer ones are always being discovered, such as one in
an old well near a mosque in Dhaka located in the non-Bengali region of the city
which was discovered in August 1999[4]. The first night of war on Bengalis,
which is documented in telegrams from the American Consulate in Dhaka to the
United States State Department, saw indiscriminate killings of students of Dhaka
University and other civilians[5].
Contents [hide]
1 Casualties
2 Atrocities on women and minorities
3 Killing of intellectuals
4 Alleged genocide
5 References
6 Further reading
7 Footnotes

[edit]Casualties
The number of civilians that died in the liberation war of Bangladesh is not
known with any reliable accuracy. There has been a great disparity in the
casualty figures put forth by Pakistan on one hand (26,000, as reported in the
Hamoodur Rahman Commission [6] ) and India and Bangladesh on the other hand
(From 1972 to 1975 the first post-war prime minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman, mentioned that 3 million died on a dozen occasions [7]). The
international media and reference books in English have also have published
figures which vary greatly: 5,000–35,000 in Dhaka, and 200,000–3,000,000 in the
country of Bangladesh [8] [9]. According to the journalist Robert Payne on
February 22, 1971 Yahya Khan told a group of generals, “Kill three million of
them, and the rest will eat out of our hands”[10].
The historian branch of the United States State Department held a two-day
conference in late June 2005 on U.S. policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972.
The State Department invited scholars from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to
express their views on documents recently declassified by the State Department.
According to Dawn, a Pakistani Newspaper, Bangladeshi speakers at the conference
stated that the official Bangladeshi figure of civilian deaths was close to
300,000, which was wrongly translated from Bengali into English as three
million. Ambassador Shamsher M. Chowdhury acknowledged that Bangladesh alone
cannot correct this mistake and suggested Pakistan and Bangladesh should form a
joint commission to investigate the 1971 disaster and prepare a report. “Almost
all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as
reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official
figure put forward by Bangladesh and India.” [11][12]
In 1997 R. J. Rummel published a book which is available on the web called
Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900, In Chapter 8 called
Statistics Of Pakistan’s Democide - Estimates, Calculations, And Sources he
states:
In East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) [General Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan and his
top generals] also planned to murder its Bengali intellectual, cultural, and
political elite. They also planned to indiscriminately murder hundreds of
thousands of its Hindus and drive the rest into India. And they planned to
destroy its economic base to insure that it would be subordinate to West
Pakistan for at least a generation to come. This despicable and cutthroat plan
was outright genocide.[13]
Rummel goes on to collate the what considers the most credible estimates
published by others into what he calls democide. He writes that “Consolidating
both ranges, I give a final estimate of Pakistan’s democide to be 300,000 to
3,000,000, or a prudent 1,500,000.”
If the rate of killing for all of Pakistan is annualized over the years the
Yahya martial law regime was in power (March 1969 to December 1971), then this
one regime was more lethal than that of the Soviet Union, China under the
communists, or Japan under the military (even through World War II).
[edit]Atrocities on women and minorities
Numerous women were tortured, raped and killed during the war. Again, exact
numbers are not known and are a subject of debate. Bangladeshi sources cite a
figure of 200,000 women raped, giving birth to thousands of war-babies. Some
other sources, for example Susan Brownmiller, refer to an even higher number of
over 400,000. Pakistani sources claim the number is much lower, though having
not completely denied rape incidents. [14] [15] [16]
Apart from Brownmiller’s, another work that has included direct experiences from
the women raped is Ami Virangana Bolchhi (“I, the heroine, speak”) by Nilima
Ibrahim. The work includes in its name the word Virangana (Heroine), given by
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after the war, to the raped and tortured women during the
war. This was a conscious effort to alleviate any social stigma the women might
face in the society. How successful this effort was is doubtful, though.
The minorities of Bangladesh, especially the Hindus, were specific targets of
the Pakistan army [17]. There was widespread killing of Hindu males, and rapes
of women. More than 60% of the Bengali refugees that had fled to India were
Hindus [18]. It is not exactly known what percentage of the people killed by the
Pakistan army were Hindus, but it is safe to say it was disproportionately
high[19]. This widespread violence against Hindus was motivated by a policy to
purge East Pakistan of what was seen as Hindu and Indian influences. The West
Pakistani rulers identified the Bengali culture with Hindu and Indian culture,
and thought that the eradication of Hindus would remove such influences from the
majority Muslims in East Pakistan [20].
At the historian branch of the United States State Department two-day conference
in late June 2005 on U.S. policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972[11],
Sarmila Bose (a Harvard-educated Indian academic related to the Indian rebel
Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose), presented a paper suggesting that the casualties
and rape allegations in the war have been greatly exaggerated for political
purposes[21]. This work has been criticized in Bangladesh and her research
methods have been attacked as shoddy and biased[22].
[edit]Killing of intellectuals
During the war, the Pakistan Army and its local collaborators carried out a
systematic execution of the leading Bengali intellectuals. A number of
university professors from Dhaka University were killed during the first few
days of the war [23][24]. However, the most extreme cases of targeted killing of
intellectuals took place during the last few days of the war. Allegedly, the
leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami and its paramilitary arm, the Al-Badr and Al-Shams
forces created a list of doctors, teachers, poets, and scholars [25]. Some
sources also allege the role of the CIA in devising the plan [26]. On December
14, 1971, only two days before surrendering to the Indian military and the
Mukhti Bahini forces, the Pakistani army – with the assistance of local islamist
leaders and groups that chose to ally themselves with the Pakistani military,
most notably the Al Badr and Al Shams – systematicly executed well over 200 of
East Pakistan’s intellectuals and scholars. Professors, journalists, doctors,
artists, engineers, writers were rounded up in Dhaka, blindfolded, taken to
Rajarbag in the middle section of the city, and executed en masse. In memory of
this event, December 14 is mourned in Bangladesh as Buddhijibi Hotta Dibosh
(“Day of Martyred Intellectuals”) [3] [27] [28]. Also, the Government of
Bangladesh has constructed a memorial in Mirpur.
[edit]Alleged genocide
After the minimum 20 countries became parties to the Genocide Convention, it
came into force as international law on 12 January 1951. At that time however,
only two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council were parties
to the treaty, and it was not until after the last of the last five permanent
members ratified the treaty in 1988, and the Cold War came to an end, that the
international law on the crime of genocide began to be enforced. As such, the
allegation that a genocide took place during the Bangladesh War of 1971 was
never investigated by an international tribunal set up under the auspices of the
United Nations, so the alleged genocide is not recognised as a genocide under
international law. However, the word ‘genocide’ was and is used frequently
amongst observers and scholars of the events that transpired during the 1971
war. Within Bangladesh, ‘genocide’ is the term used to describe the event in
almost every major publication and newspaper.[1][2]
On December 16, 2002, the George Washington University’s National Security
Archives published a collection of declassified documents, mostly consisting of
communications between US officials working in embassies and USIS centers in
Dhaka and in India, and officials in Washington DC[29]. These documents show
that US officials working in diplomatic institutions within Bangladesh used the
terms ‘selective genocide’[23] and ‘genocide’ (Blood telegram) to describe
events they had knowledge of at the time. They also show that President Nixon,
advised by Henry Kissinger, decided to downplay this secret internal advise,
because he wanted to protect the interests of Pakistan as he was apprehensive of
India’s friendship with the USSR, and he was seeking a closer relationship with
China who supported Pakistan[30].
In his book “The Trials of Henry Kissinger”, Christopher Hitchens elaborates on
what he saw as the efforts of Henry Kissinger to subvert the aspirations of
independence on the part of the Bengalis. In elaborating, Hitchens not only
claims that the term ‘genocide’ is appropriate to describe the results of the
struggle, but also points to the efforts of Henry Kissinger in undermining
others who condemned the then ongoing atrocities as being a genocide. [31]
[edit]References
Pierre Stephen and Robert Payne: Massacre, Macmillan, New York, (1973). ISBN
0025952404
Brownmiller, Susan, Against Our Will : Men, Women, and Rape, ISBN 0449908208
Nilima Ibrahim Ami Virangana Bolchhi (“I, the heroine, speak”)
Christopher Hitchens The Trials of Henry Kissinger, Verso (2001). ISBN
1859846319
[edit]Further reading
Genocide in Bangladesh, 1971, A Gendercide Watch case study.
“Killing of Intellectuals”, Banglapedia article by Muazzam Hussain Khan,
Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, 2003.
Martyred intellectuals: martyred history, Shaiduzzaman, The Daily New Age,
Bangladesh, December 14, 2005.
Bangladesh remembers intellectuals killed during 1971 war, India Daily,
December 14, 2005.
[edit]Footnotes
^ a b Editorial The Jamaat Talks Backin The Bangladesh Observer December 30,
2005
^ a b Dr. N. Rabbee Remembering a Martyr Star weekend Magazine, The December
16, 2005
^ a b Asadullah Khan The loss continues to haunt us in The December 14, 2005
^ DPA report Mass grave found in Bangladesh in The Chandigarh Tribune August
8, 1999
^ Sajit Gandhi The Tilt: The U.S. and the South Asian Crisis of 1971 National
Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 79 December 16, 2002
^ Hamoodur Rahman Commission, Chapter 2, Paragraph 33
^ F. Hossain Genocide 1971 Correspondence with the Guinness Book of Records on
the number of dead
^ Matthew White’s Death Tolls for the Major Wars and Atrocities of the
Twentieth Century
^ Virtual Bangladesh : History : The Bangali Genocide, 1971
^ Pierre Stephen and Robert Payne References needs a page number
^ a b U.S Department of State South Asia in Crisis: United States Policy,
1961-1972 June 28-29, 2005, Loy Henderson Auditorium, Tentative Program
^ Anwar Iqbal Sheikh Mujib wanted a confederation: US papers, The Dawn, July
7, 2005
^ Rummel, Rudolph J., “Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder Since
1900”, ISBN 3825840107, Chapter 8, table 8.1
^ Debasish Roy Chowdhury ‘Indians are *******s anyway’ in Asia Times June 23,
2005 “In Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, Susan Brownmiller likens it to
the Japanese rapes in Nanjing and German rapes in Russia during World War II.
“… 200,000, 300,000 or possibly 400,000 women (three sets of statistics have
been variously quoted) were raped.””
^ Brownmiller, Susan, “Against Our Will : Men, Women, and Rape” ISBN
0449908208, page 81
^ Hamoodur Rahman Commission, Chapter 2, Paragraphs 32,34
^ U.S. Consulate (Dacca) Cable, Sitrep: Army Terror Campaign Continues in
Dacca; Evidence Military Faces Some Difficulties Elsewhere, March 31, 1971,
Confidential, 3 pp
^ US State Department, “Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969-1976”,
Volume XI, South Asia Crisis, 1971", Page 165
^ Kennedy, Senator Edward, “Crisis in South Asia - A report to the
Subcommittee investigating the Problem of Refugees and Their Settlement,
Submitted to U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee”, November 1, 1971, U.S. Govt.
Press, page 66. Sen. Kennedy wrote, “Field reports to the U.S. Government,
countless eye-witness journalistic accounts, reports of International agencies
such as World Bank and additional information available to the subcommittee
document the reign of terror which grips East Bengal (East Pakistan). Hardest
hit have been members of the hindu community who have been robbed of their
lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with
yellow patches marked ‘H’. All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered
and implemented under martial law from Islamabad.”
^ The Sunday Times, London, June 13, 1971, "“The Government’s policy for East
Bengal was spelled out to me in the Eastern Command headquarters at Dacca. It
has three elements: 1. The Bengalis have proved themselves unreliable and must
be ruled by West Pakistanis; 2. The Bengalis will have to be re-educated along
proper Islamic lines. The - Islamization of the masses - this is the official
jargon - is intended to eliminate secessionist tendencies and provide a strong
religious bond with West Pakistan; 3. When the Hindus have been eliminated by
death and fight, their property will be used as a golden carrot to win over
the under privileged Muslim middle-class. This will provide the base for
erecting administrative and political structures in the future.”
^ Sarmila Bose Anatomy of violence: An Analysis of Civil War in East Pakistan
in 1971, later published in the Indian Journal, Economic and Political Weekly,
issue October 8, 2005
^ In this website, we tried to collate information concerning this paper
including Sarmila Bose’s original paper, relevant Bangla articles and
rebuttals of Bose’s paper on the Drishtipat web site. Drishtipatis a
non-profit, non-political expatriate Bangladeshi organization
^ a b Blood, Archer, Transcript of Selective Genocide Telex, Department of
State, United States
^ Ajoy Roy, “Homage to my martyr colleagues”, 2002
^ Dr. Rashid Askari, “Our martyerd intellectuals”, editorial, the Daily Star,
December 14, 2005
^ Dr. M.A. Hasan, Juddhaporadh, Gonohatya o bicharer anneshan, War Crimes Fact
Finding Committee and Genocide archive & Human Studies Centre, Dhaka, 2001
^ Shahiduzzaman No count of the nation’s intellectual loss The New Age,
December 15, 2005
^ Killing of Intellectuals Asiatic Society of Bangladesh
^ Gandhi, Sajit (ed.), The Tilt: The U.S. and the South Asian Crisis of 1971:
National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 79
^ Memorandam for the Record(PDF) August 11 1971
^ Christopher Hitchens The Trials of Henry Kissinger References Pages 44,50
Retrieved from “Bangladesh genocide - Wikipedia
Categories: History of Bangladesh | War crimes | Rebellion | Bangladesh
Liberation War
ViewsArticle Discussion Edit this page History Personal toolsSign in / create
account Navigation
Main Page
Community Portal
Featured articles
Current events
Recent changes
Random article
Help
Contact Wikipedia
Donations
Search
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Printable version
Permanent link
Cite this article

This page was last modified 03:18, 16 August 2006. All text is available under
the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)

Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers