Bangladesh mission in Islamabad observed Genocide Day

[bafxet]

you can't take that line because you denied mujib the PM job. After that independence became a legitimate option.

True that Mujeeb was denied power, but the 6 points came before going for elections. Furthermore dont forget the Aratala conspiracy was hatched in 1969.

 

[Mage]

True that Mujeeb was denied power, but the 6 points came before going for elections. Furthermore dont forget the Aratala conspiracy was hatched in 1969.

6 points were very justified. And Agartala conspiracy was never proved. Hence Mujib was released. He won the election fair and square. You give him the job.

 

[bafxet]

6 points were very justified. And Agartala conspiracy was never proved. Hence Mujib was released. He won the election fair and square. You give him the job.

Just for the sake of an argument assume that BD is still a part of Pakistan and now let me know which one of the 6 point was valid? Mistakes were definitely made but for those political mistakes made by the political personalities you break up the country?...justifiable?? especially when you go and join hands with your ache rival...bjective to achive this o

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Mistakes were definitely made but for those political mistakes made by the political personalities you break up the country?...justifiable?? especially when you go and join hands with your ache rival

Mujib or Awami League leadership didn't broke the country.They tried to the very last momet to reach a political compromize before launching operation searchlight.But Pak military junta was not enthusiastic to a negotiated settlement which could have prevented breakup.They were determined to teach Bengali a hard lesson.So they resorted to brutal mass killing instead of a settlement.If you have time I urge you to read this scholarly article written by a constitutional expert about the Mujib-Yahya talk and who prevented a political solution which might have saved Pakistan's integrity.It also discusses whether six point was really a recipe of disintegration.
Could the Break Up of Pakistan Have Been Averted?
http://www.criterion-quarterly.com/could-the-break-up-of-pakistan-have-been-averted/

 

[bafxet]

april

Mujib or Awami League leadership didn't broke the country.They tried to the very last momet to reach a political compromize before launching operation searchlight. But Pak military junta was not enthusiastic to a negotiated settlement which could have prevented breakup.They were determined to teach Bengali a hard lesson.So they resorted to brutal mass killing instead of a settlement.If you have time I urge you to read this scholarly article written by a constitutional expert about the Mujib-Yahya talk and who prevented a political solution which might have saved Pakistan's integrity.
Could the Break Up ofbd was Pakistan Have Been Averted?
http://www.criterion-quarterly.com/could-the-break-up-of-pakistan-have-been-averted/

Nobody can come out clean..
It is April 1971 nine months before BD came into being the than Maj Zia ur Rehman takes control of Chittagong radio station and raises the slogan of Jeo-Babngla is just one example. All except Jamat Islami i.e. Sh Mujeeb or Molana Abdul Hamed Khan Bhashani were calling zealously for liberation of BD. Peoples mind were poisoned to the extent that they were bowing their heads to whatever they were saying. The greatest crime committed committed by Mujeeb and party was they side with India..

 

[Homo Sapiens]

april


Nobody can come out clean..
It is April 1971 nine months before BD came into being the than Maj Zia ur Rehman takes control of Chittagong radio station and raises the slogan of Jeo-Babngla is just one example. All except Jamat Islami i.e. Sh Mujeeb or Molana Abdul Hamed Khan Bhashani were calling zealously for liberation of BD. Peoples mind were poisoned to the extent that they were bowing their heads to whatever they were saying. The greatest crime committed committed by Mujeeb and party was they side with India..

After operation searchlight, nothing was acceptable except total independence.If the military junta accepted a settlement of a federal state where East Pakistan will enjoy a higher level of autonomy instead of launching operation searchlight then all unrest would have vanished within a few days.That massive unrest was precisely because public as well as Awami league leadership rightfully suspected,military junta will not hand over power peacefully,they will resort to force.

 

[bafxet]

After operation searchlight, nothing was acceptable except total independence.If the military junta accepted a settlement of a federal state where East Pakistan will enjoy a higher level of autonomy instead of launching operation searchlight then all unrest would have vanished within a few days.That massive unrest was precisely because public as well as Awami league leadership rightfully suspected,military junta will not hand over power peacefully,they will resort to force.

Thank god one thing that you have accepted that post Searchlight independence of BD was the call.

Things don't just happen there is chain of events that leads to disaster. Searchlight might have acted as putting fueled on fire but the seed of divide were sown way back in time, 1962 (not sure, probably) addressing students of Dhaka University said that Bangla must be the national language of Pakistan not urdu.... military entered much later in the picture.

 

[Mage]

Just for the sake of an argument assume that BD is still a part of Pakistan and now let me know which one of the 6 point was valid? Mistakes were definitely made but for those political mistakes made by the political personalities you break up the country?...justifiable?? especially when you go and join hands with your ache rival...bjective to achive this o

What do you find unjustified in the six points? There were huge income disparity between the west and east side of Pakistan. Something had to be done to tackle it. What's wrong on giving the east side autonomy to manage its affairs(military and foreign affairs weren't included)?

And when there was this feeling going on East side were being exploited by the west side Mujib won the election and you deny him power. Things like this do not go without consequences. You guys have absolutely nothing to complain here.

We break up the country? A country is for its people. If a certain region is treated unfairly by the rest that region will look to separate. That is of course when that region has half of the population of the country.

 

[Bilal9]

What do you find unjustified in the six points? There were huge income disparity between the west and east side of Pakistan. Something had to be done to tackle it. What's wrong on giving the east side autonomy to manage its affairs(military and foreign affairs weren't included)?

And when there was this feeling going on East side were being exploited by the west side Mujib won the election and you deny him power. Things like this do not go without consequences. You guys have absolutely nothing to complain here.

We break up the country? A country is for its people. If a certain region is treated unfairly by the rest that region will look to separate. That is of course when that region has half of the population of the country.

I have to agree with @Philia and the reasonable opinion forwarded.

However what was destined to happen has happened, we can't turn back the clock, can we?

Let's work toward mending broken relationships between two countries for the betterment of both populations.

In time Hasina will correct her stance hopefully.......

 

[bafxet]

c

What do you find unjustified in the six points? There were huge income disparity between the west and east side of Pakistan. Something had to be done to tackle it. What's wrong on giving the east side autonomy to manage its affairs(military and foreign affairs weren't included)?

And when there was this feeling going on East side were being exploited by the west side Mujib won the election and you deny him power. Things like this do not go without consequences. You guys have absolutely nothing to complain here.

We break up the country? country is for its people. If a certain region is treated unfairly by the rest that region will look to separate. That is of course when that region has half of the population of the country.

What is justified in the six points... you tell me first? Is it justified that to have two different currencies in one country? or it is justified that there should be two armies in one country? The six points in itself was like declaration of independence full fledged liberty once in power. Even the most powerful countries like USSR could not survive and got divided on such grounds that too without a shot being fired. Which democracy in the world forbids the investment from one to another part.

Yes there was income disparity but where in the world wouldn't you find such problems. With brotherhood you sortt out these problems. Mississippi's GDP is about half of Connecticuts, going by your argument Mississippi should breakup from US. But it is not the case these sort of problems come and go, it is country which is most important must remain above all. For a moment ignore above, just think that it is India, the enemy of Pakistan you took help from, to beat and kill your own fellow country men...how shameful.

 

[Saiful Islam]

c


What is justified in the six points... you tell me first? Is it justified that to have two different currencies in one country? or it is justified that there should be two armies in one country? The six points in itself was like declaration of independence full fledged liberty once in power. Even the most powerful countries like USSR could not survive and got divided on such grounds that too without a shot being fired. Which democracy in the world forbids the investment from one to another part.

Yes there was income disparity but where in the world wouldn't you find such problems. With brotherhood you sortt out these problems. Mississippi's GDP is about half of Connecticuts, going by your argument Mississippi should breakup from US. But it is not the case these sort of problems come and go, it is country which is most important must remain above all. For a moment ignore above, just think that it is India, the enemy of Pakistan you took help from, to beat and kill your own fellow country men...how shameful.

We don't know about ground and such but the truth is the Bengalis did not see to any equal treatment however I agree that the Bengalis lacked sabr. Ask anyone of accounts of their experience and they will paint you a terrible picture. A loose federation could have worked as both countries were unified on the basis of religion, makes sense. It was better off Bangladesh emulating its former glory, perhaps Bengal Sultanate, pre-1757. We were always used to the fact that the 140,000 sq miles consisted of a Bengali Muslim ethnic group (homogeneous society).

 

[Mage]

c


What is justified in the six points... you tell me first? Is it justified that to have two different currencies in one country? or it is justified that there should be two armies in one country? The six points in itself was like declaration of independence full fledged liberty once in power. Even the most powerful countries like USSR could not survive and got divided on such grounds that too without a shot being fired. Which democracy in the world forbids the investment from one to another part.

Yes there was income disparity but where in the world wouldn't you find such problems. With brotherhood you sortt out these problems. Mississippi's GDP is about half of Connecticuts, going by your argument Mississippi should breakup from US. But it is not the case these sort of problems come and go, it is country which is most important must remain above all. For a moment ignore above, just think that it is India, the enemy of Pakistan you took help from, to beat and kill your own fellow country men...how shameful.

Here are the six points:

1. The Constitution should provide for a Federation of Pakistan in its true sense based on the Lahore Resolution, and the parliamentary form of government with supremacy of a Legislature directly elected on the basis of universal adult franchise.[1]
2. The federal government should deal with only two subjects: Defence and Foreign Affairs, and all other residual subjects should be vested in the federating states.[1]
3. Two separate, but freely convertible currencies for two wings should be introduced; or if this is not feasible, there should be one currency for the whole country, but effective constitutional provisions should be introduced to stop the flight of capital from East to West Pakistan. Furthermore, a separate Banking Reserve should be established and separate fiscal and monetary policy be adopted for East Pakistan.[1]
4. The power of taxation and revenue collection should be vested in the federating units and the federal centre would have no such power. The federation would be entitled to a share in the state taxes to meet its expenditures.[1]
5. There should be two separate accounts for the foreign exchange earnings of the two wings; the foreign exchange requirements of the federal government should be met by the two wings equally or in a ratio to be fixed; indigenous products should move free of duty between the two wings, and the constitution should empower the units to establish trade links with foreign countries.[1]
6. East Pakistan should have a separate military or paramilitary force, and Navy headquarters should be in East Pakistan.[1]

No it was for creating a federal states with regional autonomy. Look at this post from many years ago.

I have read the 6 points of Mr Mujib. And I don’t find a single point that was not workable. However, it was clear from those points that if his demands were accepted, the West Pakistani feudals and military big shots would loose their grip for ever.

Moreover Mujib was open to negotiation. And he was willing to come to an agreement with Yahya and Bhutto after he won the election. But what Yahya does? He leaves while things were undergoing discussions and orders to arrest Mujib and launch operation searchlight. Is this a way to keep your country united? And comparing Mississippi with Bangladesh is irrelevant. Mississippi doesn't contain half of US population.

The thing that led East Pakistan to become Bangladesh is your "Punjabi Master Race" mentality. Ayub Khan once said he doesn't see people of good families in East Pakistan. Is this not an attempt to alienate your population of that region? You consider us inferior and believe you have the birth right to exploit us then sooner or later there will be massive uprising. The separation could've been avoided if you guys were willing to give Mujib power which he rightfully deserved. You keep a certain group of people denying what they deserve and this is how you end up. HUMILIATED.

 

[footmarks]

Whatever happened, has happened. What we can see NOW is that Bangladesh is in much better position than it would have been if not separated from pakistan. Bangladesh is a bigger success story than pakistan has been. Their economy is growing fast too.

 

[Mage]

c


What is justified in the six points... you tell me first? Is it justified that to have two different currencies in one country? or it is justified that there should be two armies in one country? The six points in itself was like declaration of independence full fledged liberty once in power. Even the most powerful countries like USSR could not survive and got divided on such grounds that too without a shot being fired. Which democracy in the world forbids the investment from one to another part.

Yes there was income disparity but where in the world wouldn't you find such problems. With brotherhood you sortt out these problems. Mississippi's GDP is about half of Connecticuts, going by your argument Mississippi should breakup from US. But it is not the case these sort of problems come and go, it is country which is most important must remain above all. For a moment ignore above, just think that it is India, the enemy of Pakistan you took help from, to beat and kill your own fellow country men...how shameful.

Spoiler: Spoiler cuz of length

Also look how your leader thought of the Bengali people...who were in fact majority of the population.
Ayub thought that a large
> majority of Muslims in East Pakistan had “an animist base…a thick
> layer of Hinduism and top crust of Islam”. On September 7, 1967, he
> laments that “God has been very unkind to us in giving the sort of
> neighbours and compatriots we have”. He “could not think of a worst
> combination, Hindus and Bengalis”. On December 14, 1967: Bengali civil
> servants were “limited, bigoted, provincialist”, “little men with
> narrow vision”. On October 1, 1968: The immigrants in East Pakistan
> “feel for Muslim unity but the Shudhra converts, who are indigenous,
> composing the bulk of the population… have a great urge to revert to
> Hinduism”. On April 13, 1969 Ayub recalls with relish, and no doubt by
> way of endorsement, a story he heard from Kalabagh. In 1946 or so,
> Kalabagh's cousin the Sardar of Kot Fateh Khan had complained to the
> former that “this man Jinnah…is wanting us to go under the Shudras of
> Bengal”. Ayub relates this unabashedly racist comment in the context
> of demands that East Pakistan with 56% of the population should have
> 56% of seats in Parliament. The Sardar, if not Ayub, was clearly
> familiar with the basic norm and mechanics of representative
> government!
>
>
> Ayub did not hide his attitude toward Bengalis and Hindus. In his
> memoirs, Chester Bowles recalls meeting him during a visit to Pakistan
> as President Kennedy's Special Representative and Adviser on Asian,
> African and Latin American Affairs. He “knew President Ayub Khan as a
> charming, Western-oriented Sandhurst military man with, unhappily,
> little understanding of Asia or its people”. During discussions, Ayub
> “was almost as contemptuous of his own East Bengalis…as he was of the
> Indians and the Afghans”. Sir Morrice James in a report dated April 9,
> 1964, mentions the “obsessional dislike…for India and the Hindus” of
> many Pakistanis, which Ayub Khan “now shares to the full”. Altaf
> Gauhar found his attitude toward Bengalis “highly patronizing, almost
> racist”. In Friends Not Masters, Ayub mentions an important lesson he
> had learnt in school, that none should be judged “by his locality,
> colour or vintage”. He declares that it “has been an article of faith”
> for him “that a man should be judged on merit”!
>
>
> An elaborate rebuttal of Ayub's rabid observations is not necessary; a
> brief clarification, though, may not be out of place. Bengali has a
> long and rich literary tradition, and predates Urdu. In the early
> 1950's, the people of East Bengal comprised over 55% of Pakistan's
> population, and yet did not seek to impose Bengali on West Pakistan.
> They protested vigorously only when Urdu was sought to be imposed on
> them in 1952. To Muslims, the message of Islam is universal, and
> transcends the barriers of class, caste, race, language, national
> boundaries and even of time. It is thus absurd to seek a correlation
> between a good Muslim on the one hand, and the knowledge of Urdu on
> the other.
>
>
> In June 1964, Sir Morrice James described the Ayub regime as
> “essentially a Punjab-Pathan autocracy seasoned with emigres from the
> UP”. Three years later Sir Cyril Pickard reported that Ayub “chooses
> to exercise a one-man rule”. The 1962 Constitution provided for parity
> of representation in Parliament between East and West Pakistan, as did
> the Constitution of 1956. Ayub wholeheartedly believed in parity
> between the two wings, but not in its corollary, namely, parity
> between and among the constituent units of West Pakistan. Parity, in
> effect, served to further marginalise East Pakistan. Altaf Gauhar
> recalls telling Ayub that Bengalis had “genuine grievances. Even what
> had been promised…under the Constitution had not been delivered”. He
> gave the example of the federal legislature and its secretariat; these
> were to have been located in Dhaka, however, all “legislative work
> continued to be done in Islamabad where the assembly staff was
> permanently lodged”. The demand for provincial autonomy was the
> natural reaction. In a federal polity, autonomy is almost invariably a
> demand of the smaller or numerically weaker units, who feel the need
> for constitutional safeguards. Autonomy for provinces was part of
> Jinnah's 14 points in 1929. In Pakistan the demand came from the most
> populous province.
link: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/a-study-on-ayub-khan-based-on-his-memoirs.220365/

How do you expect the people to accept it? Unless of course you guys think you have some sort of birth right to exploit the people of the east side because they are inferior because they are Bengali. Every thing in this world has consequences. People in important position should know that their action may have long term impact. And thus act carefully. Idea of a master race won't give you any long term benefit.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

Is it justified that to have two different currencies in one country?

Two different currency was not sacrosanct point.It was said than if two currency is not possible then a single currency with adequate measure to prevent drain of resource from East Pakistan to West.Sheikh Mujib was willing to do many compromise,he even finished a draft proclamation by March 24th 1971,where there was no provision of two currency.In that draft,it was clearly said,East Pakistan will not have any right to secede from the union.There was plan that After signing/approval of that proclamation by Yahya,it will be made public.For that, he waited the entire day of 25th March for a phone call from Yahya. But Yahya was busy in cantonment with other generals about the impending military assault.After long 8 hours meeting with the general,he left Dhaka secretly by ordering the army to attack on the forthcoming night.

Which democracy in the world forbids the investment from one to another part.

Six point didn't forbade private investment from one wing to another.By 'prevent resource transfer' they meant ending discrimination of govt. revenue distribution,two Pakistan reserve bank branch in Karachi and Dhaka,so that East Pakistani earned foreign exchange remain in East Pakistan etc.It is ridiculous to suggest that six point will ban private investor from investing in from one region to another.Six point was a demand to the govt. not to the common people.

Mississippi's GDP is about half of Connecticuts, going by your argument Mississippi should breakup from US.

In the US, constituent unit like Mississippi are fully autonomous in their own internal matters.They even made their own criminal law,which differ from one state to another.For example, death penulty is legal in some states but not in others.So Mississippi have no chance to blame Connecticut for the problem of Mississippi.In the United States,poorer state like Mississippi get resource as a federal transfer from the central govt.But in united Pakistan,it was the opposite.It was the poorest province East Pakistan which was subsidizing relatively wealthy West Pakistan.Now you judge.

or it is justified that there should be two armies in one country?

There was no talk about two army in six point.It talked about a paramilitary militia for the defence of East Pakistan.This demand was raised due to the experience during the 1965 war,when East Pakistan was completely defenceless and cut off from the protection of bulk of the Pakistani military.In fact Sheikh Mujib formulated six point as a reaction to the East Pakistan's security situation in 1965 war.

just think that it is India, the enemy of Pakistan you took help from, to beat and kill your own fellow country men...how shameful.

After opeation searchlight,Pakistan became enemy of Bengali people.So enemy's enemy is friend.After declaration of independence in 26th March we became a separate country,no longer bound by the sensitivity of Pakistani ideology or norm.And West Pakistani soldier was an alien occupation force with no connection with the people of Bangladesh was doing horrible atrocity. So they didn't constituted fellow countrymen for the Bengali.If the army was 50 percent Bengali,then we could have claimed it was our army.But that was not the case.This is the main problem of Pakistan,they expected higher level of patriotism from Bengali without any participation in the state affairs.Do you think it is possible any where in the world? You should thank us that we remained in that rotten structure for long 24 years and wanted to preserve that with just participation.But West Pakistani elite were too racist to entertain the idea that Bengalis are equal to them.They wanted Bengali as a subject,not the partner of the state.So we have no option but to break that colonialist apartheid state.