What's new

CIA sensed Bangladesh independence was inevitable.

Homo Sapiens

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,641
Reaction score
-1
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/03/08/cia-sensed-bangladesh-independence-inevitable/
CIA sensed Bangladesh independence was inevitable

  • Probir Kumar Sarker
  • Published at 02:04 AM March 08, 2017
  • Last updated at 03:26 AM March 09, 2017

Flanked by party leaders, Bangabandhu holds a press conference at his Dhanmondi 32 residence in Dhaka on March 3, 1971 after ‘talks’ with Yahya Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto failed RASHID TALUKDER / PHOTO SOURCE: MUKTIJUDDHO E-ARCHIVE TRUST


The CIA recently made available online several thousand documents on Bangladesh’s pre- and post-independence events. Today Dhaka Tribune publishes the CIA’s early predictions about East Pakistan’s emancipation and observations about the strength and weakness of an independent Bangladesh, the second of a series of exclusive stories
As the chances of East Pakistan getting separated from West Pakistan increased sharply following the December 1970 elections which reflected the people’s resistance against exploitation and dominance, the CIA observed in early March that Bangladesh’s future under the rule of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s Awami League would not be a smooth journey either.


The report stated that an independent East Pakistan would begin with some assets, notably in the political realm but also including an ethnically homogenous population.


But it would “face economic problems of staggering proportions because of its dearth of natural resources, its burgeoning population, and its lack of capital, economic infrastructure, and entrepreneurial and technical skills.”

The dominant agricultural sector – mostly dependent on jute – could make little headway unless flood waters were controlled, the CIA said, adding that the process would require considerable capital.

The intelligence memorandum “East Pakistan: An Independent Nation?” dated March 1, 1971 and published online in January this year gives a glimpse of erstwhile East Pakistan’s strength and limitations, from agriculture to industrial growth and poor condition of the Bangali army men.

The secret document was prepared by the Office of Current Intelligence and coordinated within the Directorate of Intelligence.

Pre-war East Pakistan:
• Population- around 73-75 million, with 90% living in rural areas
• Literacy rate 20%
• Average per capita income about $60 (far below that in West Pakistan and not much higher than the level in 1948)
• 4.3% engaged in small-scale manufacturing industry
• 45% of workforce in jute product manufacturing
• Agricultural sector mostly dependent on jute
• Flood, drought used to strike often
• Private investment 25% of national total
• Capital was in hands of a few wealthy families migrated from Pakistan, India and Myanmar
• Power shortages and frequent outages
• Until 1970, the country had only one gas field in Sylhet
• No easily exploitable coal fields
• Hydroelectric power possibilities were limited
• Rooppur nuclear plant was set to be constructed with the support of Belgium
• In 1965, there were 151 Bangalis in civil service out of 461
• In 1970, only 11 out of 53 Pakistani heads of missions were Bangalis

LibWar.gif

Inspired by Bangabandhu’s historic speech on March 7, 1971, retired army personnel assembled at Outer Stadium in Dhaka to prepare for the Liberation War RASHID TALUKDER/ PHOTO SOURCE: MUKTIJUDDHO E-ARCHIVE TRUST

Economic situation

The rapid population growth was mentioned as the top economic factor in the report estimating the number of people to be 73-75 million in East Pakistan, a land area about the size of Florida or Arkansas, with 90% rural population and 20% literacy rate.

Based on a conservative growth rate, the CIA predicted that the population would be 115m in 1985 and 180m in 2000.


The average per capita income of East Pakistan was about $60, far below that in West Pakistan and not much higher than the level in 1948.

According to the 1961 census, only 4.3% of the East Pakistani labour force was engaged in manufacturing, almost entirely in small-scale industry.

Private enterprise was generally very inefficient in East Pakistan, where “numerous small, uneconomic shops produce similar products, using outdated methods and without sufficient capital for expansion,” the report said.


There had been little private investment in East Pakistan in comparison with the West wing, accounting to about 25% of the national total. Capital was largely in the hands of a few wealthy families who had migrated from Pakistan, India and Myanmar.


Much of the managerial class resident of East Pakistan was “composed of Urdu-speaking Muslim refugees [known as Biharis] from India, who have never been accepted by the Bangalis and who would probably move to West Pakistan if the East wing became independent.”

The CIA underscored the need for more workers with technical skills for the development of an independent East Pakistan.

Jute was the main cash crop at that time while 45% of the total industrial workforce was engaged in manufacturing jute products. But jute products had already started facing competition in the world markets from synthetics, the report said.

Also Read- ‘The showdown cannot be put off much longer’

The agricultural sector used to face massive setback due to annual flooding and drought, while the country was also subject to high salinity and devastating cyclones. The November 1970 cyclone killed at least 500,000 people in coastal areas.

East Pakistan was also facing power shortages and frequent outages due to lack of mineral resources. Until 1970, the country had only one gas field in Sylhet for power generation and producing fertiliser.

“There are no easily exploitable coal fields in East Pakistan … hydroelectric power possibilities in East Pakistan are limited.” A nuclear power plant was set to be constructed at Rooppur of Pabna with the support of Belgium in five years.

Lack of adequate transport system was another reason behind sluggish growth in East Pakistan.

Civil service and foreign ties

In 1965, there were 151 Bangalis in the civil service out of a nationwide total of 461, the CIA report said, adding: “Under Mujibur Rahman, however, a civil service might not have as great a role to play.”

As of late 1970, only a few government agencies drew as many as half of their employees from East Pakistan. Many Bangalis had held lesser positions in the bureaucracy below the elite civil service level.


In 1970, only 11 out of 53 Pakistani heads of missions were Bangalis.


“Mujib is relatively well travelled and has expressed himself on certain foreign policy aspects. He favours the restoration of trade ties with India and the peaceful settlement of outstanding disputes.

The CIA anticipated that the independence of East Pakistan might give rise to dreams among Bangalis on both sides and concern in New Delhi over the formation of a “Greater Bengal.”

“The AL does not appear to be particularly sympathetic to communist China, and some AL leaders seem suspicious of Chinese intentions,” the CIA document reads.

The US is apparently held in high esteem by several senior AL leaders. At the same time, the report stated, “there have been frequent contacts between Soviet diplomats and AL leaders, and Soviet assistance after the cyclone of 1970 was substantial.”


CIA CREST records:

On January 17, the CIA published around 930,000 declassified documents to the standalone CIA Records Search Tool (CREST) system online, some of which are about Bangladesh and erstwhile East Pakistan. Earlier, the records were only accessible in person at the National Archives Records Administration (NARA) in College Park, Maryland and through four computer terminals.

Since 1999, the CIA has regularly released its historical declassified records to the CREST system.

The documents on Bangladesh – 1,937 posted in December last year and 95 in January – include views of the CIA and the US’ Dhaka embassy about events related to politics, economy and Bangladesh ties with India and other countries.

On the other hand, the database includes 857 posts on erstwhile East Pakistan posted in December and 45 in January.
 
.
Note here,CIA sensed this inevitability of independence well before starting of Pakistani attack in operation searchlight and subsequent Indian intervention in East Pakistan.But Indian in general are adamant that Independence was impossible for us without Indian intervention.Given that,1971 was their only glory time when tested victory,it is not very hard to understand why they deny the inevitable truth.
 
Last edited:
.
Note here,CIA sensed this inevitability of independence well before starting of Pakistani attack in operation searchlight and subsequent Indian intervention in East Pakistan.But Indian in general are adamant that Independence was impossible for us without Indian intervention.Given that 1971 was their only glory time when tested victory,it is not very hard to understand why they deny the inevitable truth.

You think CIA didn't factor in Indian behemoth surrounding E. Pakistan on 3 sides and its big anti-Pakistan stance?

That's a dream scenario for any independence movement within E. Pakistan....or any such scenario anywhere in the world. CIA applied common sense as to where arms, training, sanctuary and possible direct military intervention would come from in the increasingly anti-Pakistan environment/fervor being formed among the BD public.

So what number thread on the same exact topic is this one BTW?
 
.
You think CIA didn't factor in Indian behemoth surrounding E. Pakistan on 3 sides and its big anti-Pakistan stance?

That's a dream scenario for any independence movement within E. Pakistan....or any such scenario anywhere in the world. CIA applied common sense as to where arms, training, sanctuary and possible direct military intervention would come from in the increasingly anti-Pakistan environment/fervor being formed among the BD public.

So what number thread on the same exact topic is this one BTW?
Than where is the report of CIA betting on Indian intervention as the most crucial factor?They sensed East Pakistan independence by seeing the trend around the world in that time.Vietkong guerrilla were creating big problem for USA,They have seen Algerian guerrilla war.Many countries in that time were getting independent either through negotiating with colonial power or by outright independence war.They seen same pattern in Bangladesh.I don't think Vietnamese or Algerian or others got Indian military help to win their independence.Indian military help is not something like 'Manna' from heaven without which freedom loving people can't live.
 
.
Than where is the report of CIA betting on Indian intervention as the most crucial factor?They sensed East Pakistan independence by seeing the trend around the world in that time.Vietkong guerrilla were creating big problem for USA,They have seen Algerian guerrilla war.Many countries in that time were getting independent either through negotiating with colonial power or by outright independence war.They seen same pattern in Bangladesh.I don't think Vietnamese or Algerian or others got Indian military help to win their independence.Indian military help is not something like 'Manna' from heaven without which freedom loving people can't live.
Its not about if you would have got the freedom or not,its the price you would have paid for it.
 
.
.
The CIA analysis - I don't care about..it's old and common knowledge.

I do like it when stuff like this comes up...that the sheer numbers bear out time and time again, we were not just treated like 2nd class citizens...but, WERE 2nd class citizens in erstwhile Pakistan.

20+years and they worked to develop only 'west' Pakistan and left us to essentially fend for ourselves.

It also once again points out, what a huge task awaited post war Bangladesh - we had very, very little going for us.
 
.
These are all India-Pakistan war report after 3rd December.Anyone would bet on Indian army after starting of Indo-Pak war when Pakistani army was on their last foot due to previous 8 months fighting .I am asking for report before March,1971 where CIA stated 'For any successful Independence movement of East Pakistan,Indian support is crucial,without which East Pakistan secession movement likely to fail'.Not these 'fate accompli' paper.
 
.
These are all India-Pakistan war report after 3rd December.Anyone would bet on Indian army after starting of Indo-Pak war when Pakistani army was on their last foot due to previous 8 months fighting .I am asking for report before March,1971 where CIA stated 'For any successful Independence movement of East Pakistan,Indian support is crucial,without which East Pakistan secession movement likely to fail'.Not these 'fate accompli' paper.
Yeah. India might've helped us in the war but they just took an opportunity. And they took the opportunity only after Pakistan escalated with them in the west wing. You can't seriously expect India helping to destabilize Pakistan pre-1971 when its own backdoor was wide open (Kasmir) especially when Pakistan had western blessing and India a western pariah.
 
.
Note here,CIA sensed this inevitability of independence well before starting of Pakistani attack in operation searchlight and subsequent Indian intervention in East Pakistan.But Indian in general are adamant that Independence was impossible for us without Indian intervention.Given that,1971 was their only glory time when tested victory,it is not very hard to understand why they deny the inevitable truth.
Its the job of intelligence agencies to keep doing "if & but" analysis. Don't you think CIA and other intelligence agencies have not done numerous analysis of Indian break-up, independence of J&K, North East, Tamil Nadu etc? This speculative analysis seems to be one of those which the CIA must have rubbished or else it would have reflected in their behavior in 1971. India signed a 20 years defense treaty with Soviet Union and they had no clue of what India was up to.
Birth of BanglaDesh was an outcome of a joint effort of India and Mukti Bahini. Secrets of Agartala Conspiracy are no longer a secret. A clueless Pakistan made the things easier by atrocities they perpetrated on Bengalis. It was India that delayed its intervention as Indian Army Chief when informed about this operation asked for time to intervene in BD. Then he was not very comfy about monsoons so he delayed the entire operation by 6-8 months. The US and Pakistan remained clueless during this period of 6 to 8 months.
 
.
These are all India-Pakistan war report after 3rd December.Anyone would bet on Indian army after starting of Indo-Pak war when Pakistani army was on their last foot due to previous 8 months fighting .I am asking for report before March,1971 where CIA stated 'For any successful Independence movement of East Pakistan,Indian support is crucial,without which East Pakistan secession movement likely to fail'.Not these 'fate accompli' paper.

Like I said post the entire original report being talked about in OP and lets dissect through it. There is a huge declassified CIA database, I'm not going to go through each paper.

From what I saw 99% of CIA reports focused on India versus Pakistan...and barely anything to do with the MB rebel forces....who are just mentioned here and there. Its clear for anyone to see who the CIA saw as the main agent of 1971 result.
 
.
You think CIA didn't factor in Indian behemoth surrounding E. Pakistan on 3 sides and its big anti-Pakistan stance?

That's a dream scenario for any independence movement within E. Pakistan....or any such scenario anywhere in the world. CIA applied common sense as to where arms, training, sanctuary and possible direct military intervention would come from in the increasingly anti-Pakistan environment/fervor being formed among the BD public.

So what number thread on the same exact topic is this one BTW?
India's help militarily came 8 months later... Indian generals themselves admitted they couldn't afford a full fledged war with the Pakistanis... Indias help was mostly political and strategic! Military had very little to do with it.
 
.
India's help militarily came 8 months later... Indian generals themselves admitted they couldn't afford a full fledged war with the Pakistanis... Indias help was mostly political and strategic! Military had very little to do with it.

Without India arming, training and giving refuge to the Mukthi Bahini....you can forget about BD existing today.

I am not talking about the final military intervention only.
 
.
From what I saw 99% of CIA reports focused on India versus Pakistan...and barely anything to do with the MB rebel forces....who are just mentioned here and there. Its clear for anyone to see who the CIA saw as the main agent of 1971 result.
Isn't it normal?By nature,guerrilla forces are secretive,they operate in shadow.It is very difficult even for CIA to know the plan program of Mukti Bahini.It is much more meaningful for US govt. to know what India was thinking,what Pakistan was doing,what China was planning,What Soviet was thinking.Because this things require US activism as a superpower.I am sure you will find the same pattern in case of Vietnam war.CIA had far more information and enthusiasm to collect information to share with US govt. about US military in South East Asia,Soviet or Chinese position in that conflict than Vietcong.

I acknowledge,Indian intervention acted as a catalyst for our rapid victory but there is no reason to believe that it was impossible without Indian involvement.
 
.
Without India arming, training and giving refuge to the Mukthi Bahini....you can forget about BD existing today.

I am not talking about the final military intervention only.
it was in india's interest.... after all their arch enemy is pakistan... it's foolish not to throw a paw! so it's not a favor more like personal interest....


however giving refuge to the refugees is a very humane act which i appreciate india for doing!
 
.
Back
Top Bottom