Indian Double Standards on Terrorism

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Just curious...Was Mukti Bahini ever designated as a terrorist organization by UN?

Did the 'UN Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee' exist in 1971? You know quite well that the spotlight on insurgent groups fighting today did not exist back then, nor, as TK explained, was there really enough time during the hight of the conflict in 1971 to be lobbying and pushing for these sorts of moves.

In any case, regardless of a 'UN terrorist designation, I fail to see how, even as Indian, you do not see that the EP rebels that were carrying out massacres of West Pakistani civilians (cutting off the breasts of women and killing babies even) and killed tens of thousands of West Pakistani civilians and left the bodies to rot in just a handful of cities alone, do not qualify as terrorists?

The actions of the rebels, and continued Indian support for them that prolonged the conflict, was directly responsible for Operation Searchlight and the breakdown in discipline in the PA when confronted with rebel atrocities - ultimately the open support by India for the rebels was a declaration of war on Pakistan - much as Indians argue that any terrorist attack against Indian supported by the Pakistani State will be an act of war against India.

Almost every Pakistani here has been unequivocal in condemning insurgent violence against civilians. Yet Indians continue to weasel around in not condemning Indian support for the terrorists/rebels in East Pakistan, that committed documented atrocities, while in the same breath arguing that Pakistanis are supporting terrorists in supporting insurgents. Some Indians are in fact justifying present day terrorism and atrocities by somehow arguing that the killing of school teachers, principals, laborers and other civilians is 'justified! I have seen no word of condemnation from any Indian on this thread for those people blatantly supporting the killings of innocent civilians in Balochistan.

The hypocrisy is plain, and of all people, you were one of the Indians I though would see why the Indian position on EP is wrong, and condemn IG and India for supporting terrorists in 1971.

Indians need to stop making the 'good terrorist vs bad terrorist' distinction regarding their support for terrorists in East Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Mods should i now reply in same manner used by these indians?
i hope u wont ban be on this one will ya agnostic or webie?or other frnds?
should i??

Don't reply in the same manner.

The moderation team has made clear what it expects in terms of post content and what is off limits, and those who refuse to follow guidelines will be banned.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

In the same breath sir, would you mind if a few Indians on this forum start supporting the TTP's and Balochi's calling them the freedom fighters who are fighting Pakistani forces illegal occupation of their lands.

The TTP and Balch groups have openly accepted attacks on civilians and their murders, and they openly advocate them - supporting them would be open support for terrorism, and if you wish to do so go ahead (and we will go ahead and act as we see fit). On the TTP count at least Uncle Sam will be quite interested in your 'support for them'.

 

[toxic_pus]

...nor, as TK explained, was there really enough time during the hight of the conflict in 1971 to be lobbying and pushing for these sorts of moves.

...and yet during the same time period India managed to clinch a ground breaking deal with USSR and lobby extensively against Pakistan in Europe.

The actions of the rebels, and continued Indian support for them that prolonged the conflict, was directly responsible for Operation Searchlight...

Thats batpi$$ that you are peddling. India's support came long after 25/26th March and there wasn't any significant violence that would warrant a crackdown of 25/26 March.

Even Pakistan's White Paper, which attempted to provide day by day account from 1st March to 25th March, couldn't provide any evidence of 'actions of the rebels' prior to Operation Searchlight, let alone Indian support.

Even if we assume that there was violence, why was PA withdrawn to the barracks on 3rd March (IIRC) and was only let loose on 25th March?

 

[karan.1970]

Did the 'UN Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee' exist in 1971? You know quite well that the spotlight on insurgent groups fighting today did not exist back then, nor, as TK explained, was there really enough time during the hight of the conflict in 1971 to be lobbying and pushing for these sorts of moves.

I am not refering to the terroris org label that came into being in 2001. But apart from Pakistan, who labels Mukti Bahini as a terrorist organization. Did any major world power support this contention in 1971. I dont think the Mukti Bahini phenomenon lasted just for weeks that it did not give enough time to Pakistan to push for these moves. I think Pakistan was too busy and too secure in the Operation Searchlight to think of that. The thought of branding MB as a terror org is primarily an after thought after losing the war Pakistan never expected to fight, let alone lose..

In any case, regardless of a 'UN terrorist designation, I fail to see how, even as Indian, you do not see that the EP rebels that were carrying out massacres of West Pakistani civilians (cutting off the breasts of women and killing babies even) and killed tens of thousands of West Pakistani civilians and left the bodies to rot in just a handful of cities alone, do not qualify as terrorists?

The actions of the rebels, and continued Indian support for them that prolonged the conflict, was directly responsible for Operation Searchlight and the breakdown in discipline in the PA when confronted with rebel atrocities - ultimately the open support by India for the rebels was a declaration of war on Pakistan - much as Indians argue that any terrorist attack against Indian supported by the Pakistani State will be an act of war against India.

I dont claim to know much about this war but I think the sequencing is wrong. You have the cause and effect mixed up.. Also you are leaving out the genocide committed by PA in Bangladesh the size of which is estimated by some in millions.

In my view, the closest event you can compare that time is with the partition of India and Pakistan. The atrocities on both sides were no better at that time as well..

Almost every Pakistani here has been unequivocal in condemning insurgent violence against civilians. Yet Indians continue to weasel around in not condemning Indian support for the terrorists/rebels in East Pakistan, that committed documented atrocities, while in the same breath arguing that Pakistanis are supporting terrorists in supporting insurgents.

I dont agree to this statement. There are a bunch on this forum as well who actually take pride in the events of Mumbai and make veiled threats to that happeneing again. But then idiots know no national boundaries and are truly global.

That aside, I wonder why whenever I read about Bangladesh, I see the words Pakistani genocide and sexual abuse of women.. But hardly any talk of India supported terrorism.

But as I said.. I dont know about that war much (from a Bangladesh angle). Will however do some research on that and come back with my views if anyone would be interested..

Some Indians are in fact justifying present day terrorism and atrocities by somehow arguing that the killing of school teachers, principals, laborers and other civilians is 'justified! I have seen no word of condemnation from any Indian on this thread for those people blatantly supporting the killings of innocent civilians in Balochistan.

And I find that as deplorable as people justifying deaths in Kashmir as collateral damage of a war against Indian Army...Both stands are misguided but unfortunately, one feeds the other..

The hypocrisy is plain, and of all people, you were one of the Indians I though would see why the Indian position on EP is wrong, and condemn IG and India for supporting terrorists in 1971.

Indians need to stop making the 'good terrorist vs bad terrorist' distinction regarding their support for terrorists in East Pakistan.

As I said.. dont have a researched stand on this and will come back with one.

btw if MB does turn out to be like a terror organization, is Pakistan now justifying support for terrorists in India based on that??


On a different note.. I remember the 1st war of independence (common for our 2 countries) where Indian soldiers while revolting against their leaders committed atrocities in response to the atrocities of English rule. In your view was that terrorism??

 

[Bang Galore]

Did the 'UN Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee' exist in 1971? You know quite well that the spotlight on insurgent groups fighting today did not exist back then, nor, as TK explained, was there really enough time during the hight of the conflict in 1971 to be lobbying and pushing for these sorts of moves.

That's why 2010 is not 1971 or another year. What might have been acceptable then is not acceptable now. In any case history does not begin at the point of your choosing , in this case the year 1971. What about 1965 and Pakistan's actions in Kashmir then? Can history be seen in isolation just because it suits the argument you are making?
It's almost 40 years. Move on. You tried doing the same in Punjab with the Khalistan movement in the 1980's & failed.

In any case, regardless of a 'UN terrorist designation, I fail to see how, even as Indian, you do not see that the EP rebels that were carrying out massacres of West Pakistani civilians (cutting off the breasts of women and killing babies even) and killed tens of thousands of West Pakistani civilians and left the bodies to rot in just a handful of cities alone, do not qualify as terrorists?

Maybe because we don't have to go back that far in history to see massacres. Most Indians were not even born then. Pakistan's proxies are doing that to our civilians today and have been doing that for a number of years. Going back in history to band someone terrorists is a perilous journey. At what point do you stop and why would you stop there?

Yet Indians continue to weasel around in not condemning Indian support for the terrorists/rebels in East Pakistan, that committed documented atrocities, while in the same breath arguing that Pakistanis are supporting terrorists in supporting insurgents.

You know what sounds like weaseling out?

#1)The argument that non state actors are responsible for killings in India & that the Pakistani government is not responsible for actions by terrorist groups acting from within their country or territory which is under control of Pakistan.

#2) Banning organisations because of international pressure & then allowing them to function either under a different name or allowing them to call all party meetings on water dispute with India where they seek Pakistan government's permission to get "Kashmiri mujahideen" to ostensibly carry out terrorist attacks.

#3) Claiming that Pakistan only provides moral support to the Kashmiri militants. Not having the guts to admit like below:

Simple fact is, you call whatever you call kashmiri freedom fighters, we damn care, we will and should support them in fighting the Indian occupiers and yeah if they do kill innocents, it is their own doing, for which they will be responsible, but as long as they are killing the Indian occupying force, we are with them.

and many more that I cannot be bothered to mention. I'm sure you get the drift....

The hypocrisy is plain, and of all people, you were one of the Indians I though would see why the Indian position on EP is wrong, and condemn IG and India for supporting terrorists in 1971.

None of us are going to condemn it. Get over it! Make your arguments for 2010 not for every period since 1000 A.D.

Indians need to stop making the 'good terrorist vs bad terrorist' distinction regarding their support for terrorists in East Pakistan.

You stop that for terrorists existing now now in 2010 and then ask us to go about doing it for the past. Isn't the change of title of this thread an indication that you still seek to make that distinction.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I am not refering to the terroris org label that came into being in 2001. But apart from Pakistan, who labels Mukti Bahini as a terrorist organization. Did any major world power support this contention in 1971. I dont think the Mukti Bahini phenomenon lasted just for weeks that it did not give enough time to Pakistan to push for these moves. I think Pakistan was too busy and too secure in the Operation Searchlight to think of that. The thought of branding MB as a terror org is primarily an after thought after losing the war Pakistan never expected to fight, let alone lose..

Labels are not important, actions are. And by the actions of the rebels in East Pakistan it is clear they committed acts of terror and were terrorists. As an individual looking back at these atrocities and violence against the State committed by the rebels, and India's support for them, how can you not condemn them and India's policies?

I dont claim to know much about this war but I think the sequencing is wrong. You have the cause and effect mixed up.. Also you are leaving out the genocide committed by PA in Bangladesh the size of which is estimated by some in millions.

The cause and effect is correct. Operation Searchlight was in response to the violence by rebels. Why else would a full fledged military operation be launched?

The declassified parts of the HR commission report, that was extremely critical of the military and its officers, points this out:

2. It is necessary that this painful chapter of the events in East Pakistan be looked at in its proper perspective. Let it not be forgotten that the initiative in resorting to violence and cruelty was taken by the militants of the Awami League, during the month of March, 1971, following General Yahya Khan's announcement of the 1st of March regarding the postponement of the session of the National Assembly scheduled for the 3rd of March 1971. It will be recalled that from the 1st of March to the 3rd of March 1971, the Awami League had taken complete control of East Pakistan, paralysing the authority of the federal government. There is reliable evidence to show that during this period the miscreants indulged in large scale massacres and rape against pro-Pakistan elements, in the towns of Dacca, Narayanganj, Chittagong, Chandraghona, Rangamati, Khulna, Dinajpur, Ghafargaoa, Kushtia, Ishurdi, Noakhali, Sylhet, Maulvi Bazaar, Rangpur, Saidpur, Jessore, Barisal, Mymensingh, Rajshahi, Pabna, Sirajgonj, Comilla, Brahman Baria, Bogra, Naugaon, Santahar, and several other smaller places.

3. Harrowing tales of these atrocities were narrated by the large number of West Pakistanis and Biharis who were able to escape from these places and reach the safety of West Pakistan. For days on end, all through the troubled month of March 1971, swarms of terrorised non-Bengalis lay at the Army-controlled Dacca airport awaiting their turn to be taken to the safety of West Pakistan. Families of West Pakistani officers and other ranks serving with East Bengal units were subjected to inhuman treatment, and a large number of West Pakistani officers were butchered by the erstwhile Bengali colleagues.

4. These atrocities were completely blacked out at the time by the Government of Pakistan for fear of retaliation by the Bengalis living in West Pakistan. The Federal Government did issue a White Paper in this behalf in August 1971, but unfortunately it did not create much impact for the reason that it was highly belated, and adequate publicity was not given to it in the national and international press.

5. However, recently, a renowned journalist of high-standing, Mr. Qutubuddin Aziz, has taken pains to marshal the evidence in a publication called "Blood and Tears." The book contains the harrowing tales of inhuman crimes committed on the helpless Biharis, West Pakistanis and patriotic Bengalis living in East Pakistan during that period. According to various estimates mentioned by Mr. Qutubuddin Aziz, between 100,000 and 500,000 persons were slaughtered during this period by the Awami League militants.

6. As far as we can judge, Mr Qutubuddin Aziz has made use of authentic personal accounts furnished by the repatriates whose families, have actually suffered at the hands of the Awami League militants. He has also extensively referred to the contemporary accounts of foreign correspondents then stationed in East Pakistan. The plight of the non-Bengali elements still living in Bangladesh and the insistence of that Government on their large-scale repatriation to Pakistan, are factors which appear to confirm the correctness of the allegations made against the Awami League in this behalf.

There are various other accounts, including by Westerners critical of the PA's actions in EP, that confirm the atrocities committed by the East Pakistani rebels on West Pakistanis, and some of this was discussed in this thread:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/26732-atrocities-1971-civil-war.html

The atrocities committed by the EP rebels and the fact that the military crackdown was in response to the violence by the rebels (even if there are disagreements on the scale of the violence) is IMO beyond doubt.

In my view, the closest event you can compare that time is with the partition of India and Pakistan. The atrocities on both sides were no better at that time as well..

What is being pointed out here is Indian support for rebels that destabilized a nation and committed horrific atrocities, not just a comparison of atrocities.

I dont agree to this statement. There are a bunch on this forum as well who actually take pride in the events of Mumbai and make veiled threats to that happeneing again. But then idiots know no national boundaries and are truly global.

I would argue they are in a significant minority - but the gentlemen on this thread have openly justified the murder of innocents in Baluchistan.

And I find that as deplorable as people justifying deaths in Kashmir as collateral damage of a war against Indian Army...Both stands are misguided but unfortunately, one feeds the other..

There is no comparison - in one case we have accidental deaths of civilians (collateral damage), in the other we have groups like the BLA and TTP openly claiming the killings of innocents and calling for more, in the case of the former essentially calling for a genocide.

There is a huge difference between the two POV.

btw if MB does turn out to be like a terror organization, is Pakistan now justifying support for terrorists in India based on that??

If they committed acts of terror, which it is clear they did, they are a terrorist organization. And the argument (here at least) is not that Pakistan is justified in using terrorism because India did so in 1971, but that if Indians want to call Pakistani support for the insurgency in Kashmir 'support for terrorism' and if they condemn such support regardless of whether it results in innocents being killed or not, then they should end double standards and this 'good terrorist vs bad terrorist' distinction and also condemn Indian support for terrorism in East Pakistan.

On a different note.. I remember the 1st war of independence (common for our 2 countries) where Indian soldiers while revolting against their leaders committed atrocities in response to the atrocities of English rule. In your view was that terrorism??

Let me turn it around, if you view those acts as acceptable, then does that not also make all acts in J&K by insurgents acceptable? And then does that not also make support for any and all anti-State groups in any nation (India has plenty) a legitimate goal? In which case what are Indians complaining about?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

That's why 2010 is not 1971 or another year. What might have been acceptable then is not acceptable now. In any case history does not begin at the point of your choosing , in this case the year 1971. What about 1965 and Pakistan's actions in Kashmir then? Can history be seen in isolation just because it suits the argument you are making?
It's almost 40 years. Move on. You tried doing the same in Punjab with the Khalistan movement in the 1980's & failed.

What about 1965? An attempted covert intrusion into disputed territory to spark a rebellion against an occupation? You'll find plenty of Pakistani commentators in the mainstream media condemning the Ayub decision to do that, Where is the condemnation for Indian support for terrorism (the resulted in documented atrocities and essentially a genocide against West Pakistanis) in 1971?

And atrocities and a reign of terror supported by India, that resulted in tens of thousands massacred in cold blood, and nation torn apart, cannot just be 'moved on from'. The holocaust was a crime that is condemned to this day, and a far older one than the crimes perpetrated in East Pakistan by Indian supported terrorists. One would expect Indians to have the decency to accept their wrongs and condemn those crimes and Indira Gandhi's policies in supporting them, instead of glorifying them.

The hypocrisy here, when you Indians make their own 'good terrorist vs bad terrorist' distinctions, is astounding. And as I said before, Indians would find a lot more support for their positions on Kashmir, if they applied the same standards to the events in 1971 and condemned them. Instead we have Indians now attempting to openly justify blatant terrorism and atrocities in Baluchistan using almost identical excuses to those used to justify support for terrorism in 1971.

Maybe because we don't have to go back that far in history to see massacres. Most Indians were not even born then. Pakistan's proxies are doing that to our civilians today and have been doing that for a number of years. Going back in history to band someone terrorists is a perilous journey. At what point do you stop and why would you stop there?

This is not that 'far back in history', if the holocaust can be condemned, if atrocities by the PA in 1971 can be condemned, then so can the atrocities by the EP rebels and Indian support for them.

#1)The argument that non state actors are responsible for killings in India & that the Pakistani government is not responsible for actions by terrorist groups acting from within their country or territory which is under control of Pakistan.

Given that similar non-state actors are also attacking the Pakistani State, with far more regularity, destruction and complexity than what happened in Mumbai, indicates that the argument by the GoP is legitimate and valid.

#2) Banning organisations because of international pressure & then allowing them to function either under a different name or allowing them to call all party meetings on water dispute with India where they seek Pakistan government's permission to get "Kashmiri mujahideen" to ostensibly carry out terrorist attacks.

The UN calls for a banning of an entity, it does not call for arrests and what not, and therefore cannot prevent the opening of new organizations with slight modifications, especially when the UN does not determine guilt through any sort of fair judicial process and local courts find no evidence to uphold the 'terrorist' determination.

See how the EU has struggled with similar issues related to the UN's rather opaque and flawed process of terrorist designations:

Perspectives on Terrorism - UN Terrorist Designation System Needs Reform

None of us are going to condemn it. Get over it! Make your arguments for 2010 not for every period since 1000 A.D.

Actually the arguments are for the year 1971, not 1000 A.D, though you may wish Indian State support for terrorism was that long ago. And the lack of condemnation of Indian State support for terrorism, both in 1971 and more recently in Baluchistan, only indicates what sort of poisoned mindset the GoI has brainwashed many Indians to possess.

You stop that for terrorists existing now now in 2010 and then ask us to go about doing it for the past. Isn't the change of title of this thread an indication that you still seek to make that distinction.

I am open to changing the title further if most Indians on this forum apply consistent standards and condemn Indian support for terrorism in 1971.

 

[Dr.Evil]

I am open to changing the title further if most Indians on this forum apply consistent standards and condemn Indian support for terrorism in 1971.

We will never agree to your interpretation of 1971 war of liberation of Bangladesh as terrorism.

If most of the countries of the world agree that what India had done in 1971 was terrorism then we might accept.

Apart from pakistan no one in this whole world calls it as terrorism.

This is your forum call terrorism by whatever name, whichever suits pakistan's ego.

 

[gubbi]

I am open to changing the title further if most Indians on this forum apply consistent standards and condemn Indian support for terrorism in 1971.

Did Pakistan classify them as Terrorists? IIRC, No. You cannot term them as terrorists here then.

Secondly, the group arose due to West Pakistan's unfair policies towards the erstwhile East Pakistan.

Origins of Mukti Bahini

Although Mukti Bahini was formed to fight off the military crackdown by the Pakistan army on March 25, 1971 during the climax of Bangladesh freedom movement, The crisis had already started taking shape with anti-Ayub uprising in 1969 and precipitated into a political crisis at the height of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Six-point movement beginning in the 1970s. In March 1971, rising political discontent and cultural nationalism in what was then East Pakistan (later, Bangladesh) was met by harsh[3] suppressive force from the ruling elite of the West Pakistan establishment[4] in what came to be termed Operation Searchlight.[5]
The massive crackdown by West Pakistan forces[6] became an important factor in precipitating the civil war as a sea of refugees (estimated at the time to be about 10million)[7][8] came flooding to the eastern provinces of India.[7] Facing a mounting humanitarian crisis, India started actively aiding and re-organising what was by this time already the nucleus of the Mukti Bahini.
The immediate precursor of the Mukti Bahini was Mukti Fauj ("Fauj" is the Urdu originally from Persian borrowed from Arabic for "Brigade" exported into several languages in South Asia including Bengali), which was preceded denominationally by the sangram parishads formed in the cities and villages by the student and youth leaderships in early March 1971. When and how the Mukti Fauj was created is not clear nor is the later adoption of the name Mukti Bahini. It is, however, certain that the names originated generically refer to the people who fought in the Bangladesh liberation war.

Final Phase:
The liberation forces started carrying out massive raids into enemy fronts from October 1971. After the signing of the Indo-Soviet Treaty in August 1971, India began to demonstrate more interest in the Bangladesh war. Eventually India legally entered the war on 3 December 1971 (Indo-Pakistani War of 1971) after Pakistan's preemptive air raids on some Indian cities in the western border. In fact, the Indian soldiers were already participating in the war in different guises since November when the independence fighters had launched the Belonia battle. When the Indian Army planned to avoid battles and seize the capital Dhaka in the shortest campaign possible, the Mukti Bahini made the task much easier by confining the Pakistani army and holding them back from moving towards to capital.

The situation that presented itself to India at that time was both a humanitarian crisis and an opportunity to teach the military leadership in Pakistan a lesson. And India grabbed that opportunity.

If Pakistan has classified the Mukti Bahini as a terrorist organization, then we will have no qualms condemning the actions of '71.

 

[Windjammer]

We will never agree to your interpretation of 1971 war of liberation of Bangladesh as terrorism.

If most of the countries of the world agree that what India had done in 1971 was terrorism then we might accept.

Apart from pakistan no one in this whole world calls it as terrorism.

This is your forum call terrorism by whatever name which suits pakistan's ego.

Neither does Indra Gandhi's statement that, "Indian forces have entered East Pakistan in..... SELF DEFENSE holds any water.
The other gloating terminology, "Second Liberation Of India" is also sufficient to satisfy the most ardent critic that the whole scenario was created by implying terrorism and supporting terrorist out fits to basically avenge the 1965 humiliation.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

We will never agree to your interpretation of 1971 war of liberation of Bangladesh as terrorism.

If most of the countries of the world agree that what India had done in 1971 was terrorism then we might accept.

Apart from pakistan no one in this whole world calls it as terrorism.

This is your forum call terrorism by whatever name which suits pakistan's ego.

If you do not call the massacres of innocent civilians, men, women and children, in pursuit of a political objective by East Pakistani rebels, terrorism, then please explain to me what it should be called and why the Mumbai attacks should be looked at differently.

Facts are facts - Indians cannot hide behind 'the world does not consider this terrorism'. Were the world to not consider Hitler's actions crimes, that would not change the nature of his crimes.

To refuse to accept the obvious facts of atrocities in the tens of thousands committed by EP rebels, backed by India, and hide behind absurd excuses such as 'no certificate of terrorism from the world' only shows how morally corrupt and bankrupt the mindset of some Indians has become.

It is not me who is 'calling terrorism by whatever name I please', Indians are making this distinction of 'good terrorism vs bad terrorism' by glorifying the events of 1971 and not condemning the actions of the GOI in supporting terrorism.

Apply a balanced approach, and as I said, I am open to also applying the same balanced approach.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Did Pakistan classify them as Terrorists? IIRC, No. You cannot term them as terrorists here then.

See my previous post.

Secondly, the group arose due to West Pakistan's unfair policies towards the erstwhile East Pakistan.

See my last response to Karan on how Operation Searchlight was in response to violence and atrocities by EP rebels.

 

[Dr.Evil]

If you do not call the massacres of innocent civilians, men, women and children, in pursuit of a political objective by East Pakistani rebels, terrorism, then please explain to me what it should be called and why the Mumbai attacks should be looked at differently.

Facts are facts - Indians cannot hide behind 'the world does not consider this terrorism'. Were the world to not consider Hitler's actions crimes, that would not change the nature of his crimes.

To refuse to accept the obvious facts of atrocities in the tens of thousands committed by EP rebels, backed by India, and hide behind absurd excuses such as 'no certificate of terrorism from the world' only shows how morally corrupt and bankrupt the mindset of some Indians has become.

It is not me who is 'calling terrorism by whatever name I please', Indians are making this distinction of 'good terrorism vs bad terrorism' by glorifying the events of 1971 and not condemning the actions of the GOI in supporting terrorism.

Apply a balanced approach, and as I said, I am open to also applying the same balanced approach.

Did GOP ever declare Mukthi Bahini as a terrorist Organization ?

If at all those LET terrorists are able to carveout a separate state for them, then you call them freedom fighters , Until then those Orgnizations and members are to be treated as terrorists.

Was Bhagat Singh a terrorist in your esteemed view ?

 

[gubbi]

See my last response to Karan on how Operation Searchlight was in response to violence and atrocities by EP rebels.

I do agree on the reasons for Op Searchlight.

However, why did West Pakistan not agree for the transfer of power to Mujib after the elections? Why was the 6-point program not implemented? There was a disproportionate flow of capital from the East to the West, however, the same could not be said about the political power considering that East Pakistan population made up the majority of then Pakistan's population!

There were reasons as to why the Bengalis arose in revolt. And instead of finding a political solution the rulers in W. Pakistan resorted to military might. India came into the picture much after the Op Searchlight.