Re: Why can’t you criticise
So now you are saying the issue was on West side of Pakistan? Then blame West Pakistanis.
Yes there were some acts by West Pakistanis which were wrong.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Please answer why there was an opposition and then killings in Dhaka when Urdu was chosen as national language for them? Why agitation if their language was not supposedly affected due to this decision. I just want to understand these aspects and not here to win some debate.
Why didn’t not powerful lobbies of Pakistan stopped Bhutto from playing the role in separating East Pakistan? What power did he got? Is that lengthy report called ‘Hamood u Rehman Commission report’ just talk about Bhutto?
For role of Karachi’s business community just read the chapter ‘A legend departs’ about Yusuf Haroon in the book ‘Safeguarding Sovereignty’ by Yusuf H Shirazi (ex President Karachi Chamber of Commerce and founder of Atlas Group)
Re: Why can’t you criticise
There is no doubt that Yahya was simply outclassed, both politically and intellectually, by an extremely cunning duo of Bhutto and Mujib. But it’s a fact that Yahya did go further than any other Pakistani leader to make necessary compromise to find a durable solution to East Pakistan. He was willing to give East Pakistan substantial autonomy in order to keep Pakistan together. But no matter what how comprehensive or superficial the proposed solution would be, the bottom line was always the same - Bhutto to accept Mujib as Prime Minister.
You are right, the only reason why Bhutto was even allowed to go that far with his tantrums and wilful stubbornness was due to the fact he - unlike Mujub - had support of Yahya’s most senior generals. He was a Foreign Minister under Ayub Khan, it was natural that he had a network of his own within the military. It was the intelligence that inflated his ego and gave him the false hope of becoming the undisputed PM with a report suggesting Awami Party would only win 60% of the votes in West Pakistan. How many votes and seats they actually won is all history.
Now when you hear PPP shouting and crying about always standing against military to promote democracy, doesn’t it sound like sick joke? Forget about reading proper history books, they need to have a quick look a their leader’s CV. It is not very often that I say this, but a quick revision of history has compelled me to say that whatever happened to Bhutto in 1979 was karma (the same goes for Zia’s death). He was the first original military darling of the country. He was simply beaten by the hand that once fed him.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Exactly, thats what I’m asking. A civilian was super powerful at the start of decade to break-up the country and by end of decade he was unable to save his own life. May be enough proof that real players were different than him. I recently bought a book by Dr Hameeda KhuhRo and just turning the pages I found a statement by a general about Bhutto ‘let the joker rule now’.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Bhutto was the real player behind the fall of Bangladesh. Not that Mujib was an angel, but at least his grievances were genuine. It is Pakistan real misfortune that only time when we really needed an army general to put one bloody civilian in his place, we had the services of weak and indecisive Yahya Khan, who quite literally didn’t know how to handle both Bhutto and Mujib. But tried his utmost best to bring them two on negotiations table again and again.
As with his demise, you cannot fool all the people all the time. Bhutto thought he could get away with fooling the army after 1977 elections where he made the foolish mistake of ordering them to get rid of anti-Bhutto protesters, army said enough is enough, and got rid of him instead. His lust for power was taken lightly at the beginning of the decade, but the same mistake was not going to be repeated again.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
What happened to these generals who uttered ‘enough is enough’ when Bhutto asked for getting rid of protesters, as we see worst period for protesters and freedom of speech after Bhutto’s hanging (Zia’s black era). It seems that real players are selective to use powers against same offence in different periods of history.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
That utterance wasn’t made in favour of protesters’ rights, that utterance was made to teach Bhutto a lesson. Like I said, whatever happened to him was largely to due his own karma. At the end, regardless of what happened, Pakistani people suffered. In a nutshell, post 70s was the start of worst period in Pakistan’s history. One despot leader was replaced by another.
Zia’s one stupid mistake made PPP relevant for another 30 years.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Yaar Muqa Bhai, I told you Bengalis had accepted Urdu as National language long before the division and division had nothing to do with Jinnah’s decision of making Urdu as National Language.
Please read the history again. There were few episodes of turmoil but this conflict was settled.
The issue died in 1956 long before division.
Why try to resurrect that?
The discussion about East Pakistan separation including Bhutto’s good or bad acts, all of that can be discussed later.
Your thread is about forefathers and you targeted Jinnah,… but I do not think yo have made any case as of yet to legitimately criticize Jinnah’s decision in that matter. 
Regarding your answer to my question: Why don’t you write what that book says?
Re: Why can’t you criticise
I have provided you the reference and my sincere advice after giving reference to you is do research on your own. In that article President of Karachi Chambers refers to Ayub Khan statement that when he sent delegation to East Pakistan for distribution of PIDC’s assets he came with a response ‘They don’t need Division of PIDC’s assets, they need division of Pakistan’. This chapter also talks about how well aware business community was for this separation that they avoid investing in East Pakistan as early as early 1960s. Rest you can study on your own. Its a book easily available at Ferozson’s and they deliver everywhere in the world
I didn’t criticize Jinah but just referred his decisions that proved wrong and fatal in long run as per various historians. He was a human-being and we should have courage to look at mistakes of human-beings, be it our respected founding leaders.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Yes, it is true that deep mistrust and uncertainty was brewing over East Pakistan’s future long before a formidable separatist campaign emerged, but there is no denying that 1970 elections was a historic chance to reverse all the damage. It’s a fact that Mujib had his Six Points reform agenda, and was all ready and happy to form the government in united Pakistan. It is a fact that Yahya Khan was willing to give East Pakistan substantial autonomy and accept Mujib as Prime Minister. It is a fact that Bhutto preferred the break up of Pakistan than settle with the role of opposition leader in a Bengali majority Parliament.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
I mentioned Mujib ur Rehman’s Six Point Agenda in couple of posts. To those who are interested, below is the list of those points. Interesting to note that language is no where mentioned in the agenda, and Mujib’s entire election campaign and demand for constitutional reform was based on those points. Isn’t it surprising language is not even slightly mentioned? As people in Pakistan likes to believe that the whole break up of Pakistan happened due to Bengalis not liking Urdu, then where is Mujib’s demand to get rid of Urdu as National Language?
After that Bhutto the obnoxious middle aged brat called Bengali ‘soowar ke bachey’ in front a huge crowd, and the speech was televised in East Pakistan, what on earth were Pakistanis expecting Bengali to do? Let any leader dare pass such abuse to Sindhis or Punjabis in front of a huge crowd, then let’s see what happens.
Jones. B. Owen, Pakistan: Eye of Storm, Cromwell, Yale University Press, 2009, p.158
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Thanks for writing some ‘hint’ as to what might be written in that book.
You are not correct on both points you mentioned.
1- Your statement which you wrote simply shows those people did not want to invest since they knew East Pakistanis wanted division. Right?
Where does this mean the Trade community was somehow responsible for division? 
(If still not sure, please read your own statement again)
2- Your thread is titled about criticism.
Then you mentioned language decision of Jinnah was wrong since somehow it brought the division. Basically criticizing him.
I mentioned that language decision was NOT the reason for division. It was already dead by 1956.
Then you said "I didn’t criticize Jinnah BUT just referred to his decision that PROVED to be WRONG and FATAL in long run.
Bhai! How many times you will go back and forth oh this matter before you accept the language decision by Jinnah was NOT what brought the division and you actually criticized Jinnah for wrong reason?
Please feel free to bring any other criticism for Jinnah. Thanks. 
So far your criticism for him ( as per your thread title wants to bring) has not been proven valid.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
I don’t have that energy to go in circular discussion with you :rotato:
My point is clear. Our founding leaders were human-beings (not guided by some wahi from Allah) so they did mistakes which lead to disintegration of unity. You and others got right to disagree with this and I do respect your views on this, but on the other sides there are so many historians who believe otherwise and one should respect their views as well for rectification and betterment of attitudes.
PS: This thread was not about criticizing a particular person (as you are perceiving it to be against Mr Jinah or Bengal issue) . You missed the point in OP about general attitude of other nations and response from Indian posters to that point.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Its not that break-up in 1971 was due to language issue and Mujib u Rehman six points not covering language issue is because Bengalis were able to get Bengali recognized as national language in 1956 after a decade’s long struggle.
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mahbo22d/classweb/bengali_language_movement/bhashaandolon.html
But in between the comments of our founding leaders about language issue also created bad taste among Bengali masses and they kept on observing same imposition of decisions from western wing. Shaheed monument was a symbol for struggle against the establishment and its imposed decisions. Bhutto might be last nail in the coffin, but it was not him who started slogans like ‘bhooke Bangli, nange Bangli’ which were common among masses of western part, who now put all the blame on India for break-up.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
If the language issue was resolved by 1956 and was not the factor behind the emergence of full fledged separatist campaign (as often propagated by every other arm chair ‘historian’ in Pakistan) then how can you claim that Jinnah’s decision proved to be ‘fatal’ in the long run? How can a resolved issue - which seemingly did not re-surface in the final fight - could be so confidently termed the fatal cause behind a breakup up of a country and a nasty war?
This leads me back to my original point that it’s about time that Pakistanis let go of this feel good propaganda that Bengalis separated by calling upon a deadly war because they didn’t like Urdu. Simple. They need to let go of their romantic paralogism and start learning and understanding about the deep economic inequalities and political repression felt by East Pakistanis, and what it meant to them. And how they finally had the golden chance and the opportunity to shape their own destiny within United Pakistan after 1970 elections. But sadly, a power hungry, psychotic feudal denied them that right, simply because he could. Time to start analysing real history that literally changed everything.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
At least, I didn’t believe that language was the only issue leading to separation. It was the first blow to Bengalis which introduced them to dictatorial imposition of decision on them and it shattered their trust in new country made in the name of religion. Like Bengalis, most small units believed that they had to pay price of their identity by joining Pakistan.
Even if we forget issue of Bengal and their langauge related problems, Sindh still face the same problem. Inspite of wishes of the people of povince , Sindhi has not been recognised as national language in Pakistan (while it has been recognised as national language in India). We still don’t have answer, why Sindh was not given representation in Pakistan’s first cabinet? All these things prove that there has been a lobby from the first day (which include so called founding leaders) who discriminated against particular units which created resentment and dissatisfaction among the units that we got separatist movements in almost all the provinces of Pakistan.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Frankly speaking, you need correct your facts. There is no such thing as ‘national’ language in India. India has set of official languages. Small difference in words, but huge practical implications.
Is Punjabi recognised as ‘national’ language in Pakistan? Punjab’s population alone is half of Pakistan, why isn’t their language given a special legal and constitutional recognition in the country? If anything, the biggest victim of Urdu snobbery has been Punjabi language. Partition of India was actually partition of Punjab, why did Punjabis lost their identity and half of its resources while every other ‘small unit’ still moans and groans about lost identity and what not till this day. Give those people their languages and shut their mouth right? If it’s that easy, I wonder why no one talks of this such an easy solution? But I agree, those damned so called founding fathers of Pakistan, robbed poor Punjab of its identity, people and land. How dare they? Perhaps time for Punjab to rebel against Urdu language, totally shun it like Bengalis or how Sindhis are itching to do, re-define their ethnic superiority through the sheer power and influence of language and tell everyone else to sod off. You wanna come, work and live in Lahore/Faisalabad/Sialkot, you must only converse in Punjabi.
You have just thrown another deeply flawed argument by comparing classification of languages in India with non- classification of languages in Pakistan. This is exactly why Pakistan hasn’t made any serious progress in few decades because its people cannot look beyond ethnic identity. They are too swallowed up by victim complex to think anything else. The national psyche is forever plagued either by self pleasing religiosity or misplaced ethnic pride.
Sorry, Muqawwee, not everything in this post is for you. But I’m genuinely sick and tired of these pathetic debates on ethnicity and religiosity.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
I have to agree with Jolie. Sindhi is official in Sindh and it can’t be in Pakistan if you go by East Pakistan logic. Bengali was like 99%? of East Pakistan and sindhi is not majority in w. Pakistan.
In my understanding, the language issue would be a memory if Bengalis had gotten a good deal in Pakistan (circa 1970). I forgot this guy’s name, but he was from Karachi and he replied that he didn’t believe in apologizing to Bengalis (they brutally killed any “west Pakistani” in war) but we should be sorry on how we treated them earlier on. It was on Capital Talk.
To me, six points were very workable though we could introduce separate federal taxation like in the US to avoid the govt being hostage to local east or west Pakistan politics. The crux of the matter was that Bengalis were majority and west Pakistan didn’t want to be ruled by them. There is a logic to it as Dhaka could be capital of Pakistan that could be overrun in a war with India or flooded by indian rivers (open up a dam).
The 1956 constitution gave parity between East and West Pakistan, hence the One Unit though I have serious reservation on centralizing power into Lahore. I am not sure but was Bhutto even open to having two PMs for east and west Pakistan? An apartheid situation with west Pakistan ruling over east Pakistan was untenable and west Pakistan didn’t want to be ruled by Bangladesh for some valid reasons, so I think separate but equal was the best solution.
Anyway, it is the past and we don’t have time machines to go fix problems not that I could see even convincing people from that era 
We are in a similar situation with Punjab that is bigger than Pakistan, though it isn’t that bad. One, we are all connected and people can move around to provines (in theory) and secondly, there is some rapport that can be established between different ethnic groups in Pakistan which was harder with Bengalis since they were far away and the written script (close to sanskirt) gladly helped with conspiracy theories.a
Re: Why can’t you criticise
All I did was to summarize what you said and what I said.
There is nothing ‘circular’ in that.
And this is actually a “linear discussion”. Meaning, you said something and I brought answers. Two persons going in a discussion one after other does not make the discussion circular. 
Rest of your post is simply means you are avoiding or trying to escape.
P.S. There are few other guppies who have tried to use the excuse of “circular logic”/“circular argument” before when they were unable to prove their positions right, without even knowing what circular argument/discussion even means to begin with. 
I may write sometime later about what circular or any other different arguments/discussion means.
I already mentioned the issue was dead by 1956 in post # 148.
Thanks for acknowledging it and confirming it.
Why do you keep contradicting after saying ‘but’?
Seriously speaking:
Muqa Bhai!
Few thing need to be very clear to you AND to anyone who reads this, Pakistani or not.
1- MA Jinnah’s decision about National Language being Urdu of Pakistan was NOT the reason for division of East and West Pakistan.
2- The issue was dead by 1956. Saying that it was a fatal decision is simply wrong.
3- The ‘bad taste’ was BEFORE 1956 on this issue. Not after that.
4- West Pakistani administration exploited, ridiculed, disrespected and killed East Pakistanis because West Pakistanis were wrong. They were short sighted.
5- Bhutto was one of the big evil factors in division of Pakistan for being a hungry dog running after the bone of Prime Ministership and called Bengalis names basically showed his hatred and racism.
6- India exploited the situation and used its own evil and devilish intention to break Pakistan for whatever excuse it found at the time.
More later if time permits.
Re: Why can’t you criticise
Well said.