My view is that history is simply a version of the "truth". The prevailing one is always that adopted by the victors.
History is subject to interpretation, yes, usually by the victors, in this case the victor has been India, not Pakistan or Bangladesh in my opinion, and they are trying to keep their version intact, not just among Indian population, but among Bangladeshi population as well, using their agent Awami League.
Pakistani's of course do not subscrible to the Indian version of history and they have their own version.
The one I am trying to come up with based on all available sources so far I have come accross, is neither Indian, or Pakistani or Bangladeshi version. So lets just say it is Kalu_miah's version of history, just like there is a Kalu_miah's version of world order and future projections.
I personally am not particularly hung up on Pakistan because in its state it did not work for bangladeshis.
Every leader from the east was forced down. It is also true that every western politician was also put down by the military who were overwhelmingly punjabi. After jinnah created the first rift with east by wanting Urdu to be the state language every subsequent forced action by the military who was seen as simply west Pakistani served to cement the view that bengalies has a choice live as second class citizen in Pakistan or be free.
My opinion about this kind of point of view is that it is short sighted and misguided and shows the impatience and incompetence of a political elite and middle class that are incapable of sound leadership of their masses. Pakistan needed more time to work out its problems and even if they could not be worked out, an amicable divorce could be sought without India's hand in it, who purposefully engineered a civil war, which was against our interest (killed people and severely injured relationship with another large Muslim nation).
I hold the same view about 1947 paritition also. In my view a peaceful nonviolent partition could have been achieved later if needed and if Hindu's and Muslims could not get along, there was no hurry to go for it in 1947.
Question I have for you is, where does this stop, should Sylheti's and Chittagonians have their own country, what about North Bengal, west of Jamuna and north of Padma? Also please look at this RAW project:
Border Delineation and Geopolitical Wrangling between India and Bangladesh | BDINN.com
Although Bangabhumi Andolan does not seem to be very potent, Bangladesh is worried. According to Bangladeshi sources, the movement has set up more than a dozen training centres with clandestine supply of money and arms
with the objective of arms struggle for creation of the Hindu land. It has also staged public rallies on Indian territory, most recently in July 2010. Both Bangladeshi and Pakistani sources have accused India of supporting Bangabhumi Andolan in order to destabilize Bangladesh. According to Pakistan Defense, the Indian external intelligence agency RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) created the group in order to disintegrate Bangladesh. Several hard-core Hindu nationalist groups have rallied to the cause. A 2003 article on an extremist website asks, how long can the Hindus live under House-Arrest in the Barbaric Bhoot-Bangla of Bangladesh? The article itself is tellingly entitled, Recognize The New Hindu State As You Cowards Recognize Islamic Bogusdesh. (According to the website in which it appears, Bangladesh is a bogus countryhence Bogusdeshoriginally created by the British
[as East Pakistan] to cut off direct land, spiritual, trade and cultural communications between Hindu Bharat and Buddhist Myanmar.)
If the Indian intelligence agency RAW has indeed created Bangabhumi Andolan to use against Bangladesh, it could be playing with a two-edged sword. Recent reports claim that the organization also wants to hive off a section of the Indian state of West Bengal for its proposed country, thus potentially diminishing India. It is entirely possible, however, that Bangladeshi partisans would regard such claims to Indian territory as a mere smokescreen, designed to superficially distance Bangabhumi Andolan from its handlers in Indian intelligence. In South Asian geopolitics, such allegations of subterfuge are hard to escape.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...olan-set-july-22-grand-rally-west-bengal.html
In my view, smaller country's create intractable geopolitical problems and they are more vulnerable on world stage while trying to make a place for themselves. You can find details of my views on this issue here, if you have not already seen this thread:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...orld-order-road-map-future-8.html#post2772275
That said, I consider both break ups as irreversible and rather promote our joining ASEAN, where a new ASEAN+ can be created including Japan and South Korea. I have no intention to promote any union with Pakistan or India in the future.
Mujib was not such a leader who could have created such a feeling in the country. It existed, when he was not allowed to form government in 1970, it came to ahead and events proceeded to its natural conclusion. Indian actions were self serving but natural, the root cause of Pakistani breakup was in Pakistan itself.
Yes, that is a good statement. Mujib had no such brains, he was making moves with advices from Indian intelligence. Again with due respect, I disagree with your view, the root cause was not just in Pakistan it was threefold as I stated in OP:
1. Unfair treatment of Bengalis in East Pakistan, which was exeggerated
2. Presence of leaders such as Mujib who could be manipulated and used as "useful idiots" by Indian intelligence, because of their greed for power (note how this was proven during Mujib's rule 1972-1975)
3. Presence of India and its interest, which were mainly to break Pakistan at any cost, to reduce the threat from a United Pakistan and also to secure North East states
So as I said looking at it from a Pakistani perspective he was a traitor. Bangladesh may not have existed but consciousness of a people who formed the Muslim league in Dhaka did exist and it was not prepared to play second fiddle within Pakistan.
In 1947 Pakistan was created based on two nation theory, breaking it with covert advice and assistance from India, an enemy state who we had war with, all the while showing the 6 point movement as a deception facade asking for autonomy, I cannot accept this as an honorable course of action.
You yourself have mentioned two things:
1.
I do not believe for one moment he thought Bangladesh would be a sovereign state
2.
But once the killing started in 71 it was over
So using your words, we can see the feeling that was there before 1971 March 25, was for autonomy but not for independence way back in 1967-1969 when Agartala case and trial played out. Note my other post here, how Agartala case was used to make Mujib into a national hero, as he was a "victim of framing by ISI":
http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...what-does-mean-our-history-2.html#post3206420
Mujib who was absent all throughout the liberation war could not row back events. He was also incredibly Inept in dealing with India and governing. But it is my personal belief that mujib was loyal to his people but did not have command of events.
Mujib had already done enough in a decade long effort working with Indian intelligence, so his part was done long before 1971. But this is off topic and not relevant, as we are not discussing 1971 war, rather Agartala case.
Post 1975 Hasina took refuge in India, was converted to a puppet. BAL won the last election bankrolled by India with connivance a section of the army who wanted amnesty for their crimes for the previous two years.
These statements ring true.
BAL is certainly treacherous but only not to the extent you claim in my opinion.
Any entity that maintains working relationship with a foreign intelligence agency of a hostile nation, I would consider them as foreign agent and promptly put such people in jail with charges of espionage. Usually only neighbors who share borders can be hostile enough to harm a nations interest, so I would specially be wary of Indian intelligence and Burmese intelligence. On the other hand, I would welcome more relationship with ASEAN (or ASEAN+) nations, a strategic direction that I believe will be beneficial for Bangladesh and its future.
which has no citations for the said quotes.
