BSF played key role in formation of Bangladesh, says new book

[TopCat]

I wanted to know thought of Bangladeshi friends on Mukhti Bahani, I had not clue about it before I joined PDF. I have been told by my Pakistani friends that it was a terrorist organization created by India? Is it true? How much credit of creation on Bangladesh goes to them.

Those muktis include big portion of Pakistan army and BDR who defected in 1971. They were the core of Muktis and later Bangladesh army. India did help in providing arms and ammunition and training facilities for new recruits.

Muktis were terorist.. joke of the century. That makes some of our president as terorrist.

 

[M_Saint]

New Delhi, Dec 2 (IANS) “Do what you like, but don’t get caught.” This was then prime minister Indira Gandhi’s laconic fiat authorizing the Border Security Force (BSF) to take on Pakistani troops several months before the India-Bangladesh war actually erupted on Dec 3, 1971 - exactly 38 years ago.
So says K.F. Rustamji, a legendary police officer who founded the BSF in 1965 and who was its head when civil war erupted in the then East Pakistan leading to its secession and its birth as independent Bangladesh.

In a highly readable book, “The British, The Bandits and The Bordermen” (Wisdom Tree), Rustamji reveals that the Indian Army chief issued orders March 29, 1971, providing limited assistance to Bengali guerrillas pitted against Pakistani troops. After quoting what Indira Gandhi told him, Rustamji says: “Nothing more was spelt out as nothing could be foreseen of the rapid developments that would follow. The direction gave me the liberty to take steps which ultimately produced results.

“Thus the BSF entered the scene in the midst of a surcharged atmosphere and rising expectations. The Force consisted of a few officers and about 100 men well versed in commando raids, demolition, etc.

“The Force was organised to carry out tasks in support of the freedom struggle by the people of East Pakistan. The aim was to provide aid to the freedom fighters to carry out their assignment successfully.”

It was not long before the BSF made contact with the most senior leaders of the Awami League party who had survived the massacres of the Pakistani forces - Tajuddin Ahmad and Amirul Islam. When BSF’s Golok Majumdar met them for the first time, they “were barefooted, haggard and disheveled and were wearing a lungi and a singlet. They had walked across from Dacca (Dhaka)”.

According to the book, edited by P.V. Rajgopal, the BSF played a key role in the formation of the Bangladesh provisional government, in framing its constitution and in selecting a national flag and national anthem. The BSF also contributed to the defection of Pakistan’s Deputy High Commissioner in Kolkata - the first instance of its kind as Bengali officers in the diplomatic service gave up their allegiance to Islamabad.

“According to the plan, all over the (India-Bangladesh) border, the BSF and Mukti Bahini established a compact which made history. What impressed me was the identity of interest.”

Rustmaji says Indira Gandhi wanted the Indian Army to go into action in East Pakistan in May 1971 but the army chief, General ‘Sam’ Mankeshaw, refused to oblige.

“The chief was clear in his mind that he would go into battle only when he was sure of victory and was also confident of having enough men and material on the Sino-Indian border to guard against a thrust from that side.”

The book says that even after the army got involved in Bangladesh, it leaned on the BSF for coordination with Mukti Bahini and local knowledge.

“The BSF boys started assisting the Mukti Fauj (later Bahini) in causing subversion and sabotage deep inside East Pakistan and even in district headquarter towns, where cash and weapons were looted and made over to the government of Bangladesh.”

The book says that at the height of the unrest in East Pakistan, the Soviet and American intelligence agencies tried to infiltrate the ranks of the freedom fighters.

“The US intelligence agency men were in regular touch with some Awami League leaders and more so with Khondakar Mushtaq Ahmed.”

In September 1971, Indira Gandhi said she might give the green signal for the Indian military thrust into East Pakistan in the third week of November. The war broke out on Dec 3, 1971, leading within a fortnight to the mass surrender of Pakistani troops and the birth of Bangladesh as an independent nation.

BSF played key role in formation of Bangladesh, says new book

Indians are committing similar crime against PAK again from Afghanistan at this time to balkanize itself once again that has long been suspected. Here we go for the details,

Indian three-star General planned suicide attacks in Peshawar: Gabol

Minister of State for Shipping Nabeel Gabol said a three-star Indian General planned the blasts occurred in Peshawar last month and RAW agents used kidnapped Afghans for suicide attacks. Indian agents supplied weapons in a attack on Sri Lankan cricket team. Pakistan will inform India and international community about this. Nabeel Gabol said Indian High Commission in Kabul has turned into RAW headquarters. While commenting on India’s stance about involvement in Balochistan in an exclusive interview to a private TV channel, Gabol said the goal of Indian High Commission in Kabul is to target Pak and India is not only involved in Balochistan but it is also responsible for recent blasts in Peshawar and Pakistan has evidences of Indian involvement. Replying to a question, Gabol said India is involved in Balochistan since six years. India had killed 300 to 400 people in response of Mumbai attacks. Pakistan is fully capable to reply but Pakistan wants peace in the region. The issue had been discussed with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her visit to Pakistan and we will provide evidences to India through international community, he added.

Indian three-star General planned suicide attacks in Peshawar: Gabol | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online

 

[Hulk]

Indians are committing similar crime against PAK again from Afghanistan at this time to balkanize itself once again that has long been suspected. Here we go for the details,

Indian three-star General planned suicide attacks in Peshawar: Gabol

Minister of State for Shipping Nabeel Gabol said a three-star Indian General planned the blasts occurred in Peshawar last month and RAW agents used kidnapped Afghans for suicide attacks. Indian agents supplied weapons in a attack on Sri Lankan cricket team. Pakistan will inform India and international community about this. Nabeel Gabol said Indian High Commission in Kabul has turned into RAW headquarters. While commenting on India’s stance about involvement in Balochistan in an exclusive interview to a private TV channel, Gabol said the goal of Indian High Commission in Kabul is to target Pak and India is not only involved in Balochistan but it is also responsible for recent blasts in Peshawar and Pakistan has evidences of Indian involvement. Replying to a question, Gabol said India is involved in Balochistan since six years. India had killed 300 to 400 people in response of Mumbai attacks. Pakistan is fully capable to reply but Pakistan wants peace in the region. The issue had been discussed with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her visit to Pakistan and we will provide evidences to India through international community, he added.

Indian three-star General planned suicide attacks in Peshawar: Gabol | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online

Do not know how many Pakistani believe in credibility of this newspaper Nation. If you accept it, then I can pull some very spicy news from this paper. I visit this paper often, find lot of funny news.

 

[SU-57E]

@ M_SAINT
just for a second forget about what india is doing even though all this is alleged by some newspapers with questionable credibility .... are you sad with what india did for your country in 71 and what happy/indifferent with what pakistan did.... and you are and others in bangladesh share your views then i would have to say we did a mistake in 71..... i rest my case your honour....

 

[eastwatch]

Your comments are superficial and ignorant and reveal your Indian sympathies. I see through your pretense of being a patriotic Bangladeshi. You are nothing of the sort but merely a fifth columnist posing as a proud Bangladeshi.

It seems a hypocrite like you knows everything. Yes, Mir Zafars know better than others. Stop mud throwing towards my country.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Was it not appropriate for Yahya Khan to convene the National Assembly on March 25, 1971? They refused to do so. So, are they not responsible for the separation? But, you are coming with a BSF patting theory.

It was not appropriate for YK and ZB to deny political rights won by the AL in elections, but it was also not appropriate by any means for fellow Pakistanis to go on a rampage murdering and rioting against the government, forcing it to crack down, and it was not appropriate for the neighboring country to take advantage of the internal political chaos and exacerbate and further fan the flames of violence.

East Pakistanis were not enslaved, segregated or mistreated like the African and Native Americans in the US, or elsewhere in Latin America. East Pakistanis were not, before the chaos of 1971, abducted, tortured and murdered in the tens of thousands as the Indians did in Indian Punjab and Kashmir. East Pakistani issues were manageable in that they were issues of political representation and political rights, and the struggle to obtain those rights should have continued to have been a political one.

Instead, arms were taken up against the state, and the assistance of a hostile neighbor gladly accepted in wreaking havoc against the state and non-Bengali civilians that pushed the situation to a point of no return.

 

[Hulk]

It was not appropriate for YK and ZB to deny political rights won by the AL in elections, but it was also not appropriate by any means for fellow Pakistanis to go on a rampage murdering and rioting against the government, forcing it to crack down, and it was not appropriate for the neighboring country to take advantage of the internal political chaos and exacerbate and further fan the flames of violence.

East Pakistanis were not enslaved, segregated or mistreated like the African and Native Americans in the US, or elsewhere in Latin America. East Pakistanis were not, before the chaos of 1971, abducted, tortured and murdered in the tens of thousands as the Indians did in Indian Punjab and Kashmir. East Pakistani issues were manageable in that they were issues of political representation and political rights, and the struggle to obtain those rights should have continued to be a political one.

Instead, arms were taken up against the state, and the assistance of a hostile neighbor gladly accepted in wreaking havoc against the state and non-Bengali civilians that pushed the situation to a point of no return.

There comes perspective in play, you are calming to know about Punjab and Kashmir by just reading fabricated stories on newspaper. Have you ever met someone from Punjab to tell you this, or had first hand experience. All my friends have been Sikhs from Punjab, it was never that case that thousands have been abducted. Also you over simplified 1971, we had a million plus refuge from Bangladesh and yes we took advantage of situation and I support that action.

When India started in 1947 Nehru never wanted to have an Army, he even said that who will attack us. Then 1948 happened and it followed by 1962, Pakistan saw a chance in 1965 and attacked us. It made sense to make use of opportunity to reduce the threat and we used it.

 

[Spitfighter]

It was not appropriate for YK and ZB to deny political rights won by the AL in elections, but it was also not appropriate by any means for fellow Pakistanis to go on a rampage murdering and rioting against the government, forcing it to crack down, and it was not appropriate for the neighboring country to take advantage of the internal political chaos and exacerbate and further fan the flames of violence.

East Pakistanis were not enslaved, segregated or mistreated like the African and Native Americans in the US, or elsewhere in Latin America. East Pakistanis were not, before the chaos of 1971, abducted, tortured and murdered in the tens of thousands as the Indians did in Indian Punjab and Kashmir. East Pakistani issues were manageable in that they were issues of political representation and political rights, and the struggle to obtain those rights should have continued to have been a political one.

Instead, arms were taken up against the state, and the assistance of a hostile neighbor gladly accepted in wreaking havoc against the state and non-Bengali civilians that pushed the situation to a point of no return.

India had no choice but to intervene, millions of Bangladeshis flooded into India, furthermore, Pakistan invaded Kashmir every time it felt like it ('47 & '65), we had to make sure we didn't have to fight on two fronts.

 

[qsaark]

Even though I agree in full with what Agno has said, I would like to say that it was also not correct for the civil/military bureaucracy, and politicians of West Pakistan to test the patience of the Bengalis. There was nothing in the Mujib’s famous (or infamous) six points that could not be settled but would it? What Mujib was asking was provincial autonomy (as it was promised in the 1940 Pakistan resolution) and we let them part but not granted them that. Even after almost forty years we are still not ready to give the autonomy to the rest of Pakistani provinces. So it is a good and desirable thought that the Bengalis should have continued their struggle politically instead of taking up arms but looking back forty years, I don’t think it would have been the right choice from a strictly Bengali point of view. I have some Bengali friends and whenever we discuss about those fateful days, they always bring my attention to the fact that if we (Pakistan) are not ready to give provincial autonomy in 2009, how that could have happened politically forty years back in the former East Pakistan?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

There comes perspective in play, you are calming to know about Punjab and Kashmir by just reading fabricated stories on newspaper. Have you ever met someone from Punjab to tell you this, or had first hand experience. All my friends have been Sikhs from Punjab, it was never that case that thousands have been abducted. Also you over simplified 1971, we had a million plus refuge from Bangladesh and yes we took advantage of situation and I support that action.

When India started in 1947 Nehru never wanted to have an Army, he even said that who will attack us. Then 1948 happened and it followed by 1962, Pakistan saw a chance in 1965 and attacked us. It made sense to make use of opportunity to reduce the threat and we used it.

The Indian argument (excuse) is that the crackdown by the PA caused a flood of refugees that forced India to intervene in East Pakistan - this argument is a crock of shite.

1. Operation Searchlight was initiated on March 26, and the article points out that orders to intervene in EP (by the BSF) were issued on March 29 - this debunks the argument of 'millions of refugees' since Op. Searchlight first envisioned controlling the cities and then cracking down on the revolt - 3 days is not enough for that and this 'millions of refugees caused us to intervene' lie stands exposed once more.

2. On Punjab atrocities by the India, I am going by open source literature - I don't have to 'meet' someone from Indian Punjab to do so.

Pakistan did not attack India in either 1948 or 1965 - in both cases our efforts were focused on the internationally recognized disputed territory of Kashmir.

And while lamenting about 1948, don't forget that India did much the same by militarily occupying and annexing the Princely states of Junagadh and Hyderabad - so India was no 'pacifist angel' in 1947.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

India had no choice but to intervene, millions of Bangladeshis flooded into India, furthermore, Pakistan invaded Kashmir every time it felt like it ('47 & '65), we had to make sure we didn't have to fight on two fronts.

See my reply to Indian rabbit above - the argument of 'millions of refugees' is a canard given that India decided to intervene 3 days after Op. Searchlight. Secondly, other books on RAW have argued that it was intervening in East Pakistan as early as the mid to late sixties, which again precedes the 'refugee exodus' and debunks that particular excuse.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Even though I agree in full with what Agno has said, I would like to say that it was also not correct for the civil/military bureaucracy, and politicians of West Pakistan to test the patience of the Bengalis. There was nothing in the Mujib’s famous (or infamous) six points that could not be settled but would it? What Mujib was asking was provincial autonomy (as it was promised in the 1940 Pakistan resolution) and we let them part but not granted them that. Even after almost forty years we are still not ready to give the autonomy to the rest of Pakistani provinces. So it is a good and desirable thought that the Bengalis should have continued their struggle politically instead of taking up arms but looking back forty years, I don’t think it would have been the right choice from a strictly Bengali point of view. I have some Bengali friends and whenever we discuss about those fateful days, they always bring my attention to the fact that if we (Pakistan) are not ready to give provincial autonomy in 2009, how could that happen politically forty years back in the former East Pakistan?

Qsaark,

One must also take into account that at that time the rights of both East and West Pakistanis had been usurped by a military dictator and shrewd power hungry politician who was playing sycophant to the dictator in order to gain power for himself.

The entire political situation was unnatural, and the political struggle should have continued. Pakistanis (in today's Pakistan) have perhaps suffered the most in terms of a lack of strong political and civilian institutions in that they keep being pushed back to square one every time a military coup happens. We then start all over again with a new government and the process of political maturation our political leadership seems intent on going through, incapable that it is of learning from history.

And despite all that suffering, denial of rights, denial of justice, corruption, inflation and what have you, Pakistanis have for the most part remained peaceful and born their burden and silently prayed, struggled and continued with their lives in the hope for a better and prosperous tomorrow.

I cannot condone the violence by rebels in East Pakistan in attempting to 'change the system' any more than I can condone the violence by the Taliban attempting to 'change the system'.

What is done is done - I do not begrudge the Bangladeshis their independence, nor do I have even a sliver of sentiment towards Bangladesh as a part of Pakistan. But I believe that as a matter of principle it must be pointed out that what the rebels in EP did was criminal, just as what the Taliban and Baluch militants in Pakistan, and the Maoists in India are doing is criminal.

 

[qsaark]

But I believe that as a matter of principle it must be pointed out that what the rebels in EP did was criminal, just as what the Taliban and Baluch militants in Pakistan, and the Maoists in India are doing is criminal.

No, I do not think that is correct to say (of course you are free to believe whatever you like to and I have no problem with that) at least in the case of Bengal and Balochistan. There were certain conditions on which various provinces and princely states had agreed to join either India or Pakistan. As per the 1940 Pakistan Resolution, the provinces were going to get autonomy.

‘No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable to the Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.’

Since the successive governments of Pakistan failed to deliver to the states and provinces which was promised in the Lahore resolution as well as in the April 7, 1946 Delhi resolution, the states were no longer bound to remain with Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No, I do not think that is correct to say (of course you are free to believe whatever you like to and I have no problem with that) at least in the case of Bengal and Balochistan. There were certain conditions on which various provinces and princely states had agreed to join either India or Pakistan. As per the 1940 Pakistan Resolution, the provinces were going to get autonomy.

‘No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable to the Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regions which should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may be necessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in the North-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous and sovereign.’

Since the successive governments of Pakistan failed to deliver to the states and provinces which was promised in the Lahore resolution as well as in the April 7, 1946 Delhi resolution, the states were no longer bound to remain with Pakistan.

The Lahore resolution does not govern Pakistan, the constitution of Pakistan governs Pakistan and is the compact under which all Pakistanis have to live.

Regardless, if certain rights are denied the people of Pakistan, then the appropriate course of action, as shown by Dr. Martin Luther King, is of peaceful protest and activism.

 

[Hulk]

The Indian argument (excuse) is that the crackdown by the PA caused a flood of refugees that forced India to intervene in East Pakistan - this argument is a crock of shite.

1. Operation Searchlight was initiated on March 26, and the article points out that orders to intervene in EP (by the BSF) were issued on March 29 - this debunks the argument of 'millions of refugees' since Op. Searchlight first envisioned controlling the cities and then cracking down on the revolt - 3 days is not enough for that and this 'millions of refugees caused us to intervene' lie stands exposed once more.

2. On Punjab atrocities by the India, I am going by open source literature - I don't have to 'meet' someone from Indian Punjab to do so.

Pakistan did not attack India in either 1948 or 1965 - in both cases our efforts were focused on the internationally recognized disputed territory of Kashmir.

And while lamenting about 1948, don't forget that India did much the same by militarily occupying and annexing the Princely states of Junagadh and Hyderabad - so India was no 'pacifist angel' in 1947.

I agree without going into discussion we attacked you in 1971 and helped create Bangladesh. You have also attacked us many times before 1947 (as claimed by fellow Pakistani's that, they own all Muslim attacks on India). So it is Pakistan that has attacked India more then India did, lets leave it to History and think about present and future.