What's new

The political victimisation of Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy

dadeechi

BANNED
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
4,281
Reaction score
-8
Country
India
Location
United States
The political victimisation of Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy
Akhtar Balouch — Published Jul 21, 2015 03:33pm

55ace8f0d22c5.jpg
Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy — A photograph from his biography that Begum Ikramullah penned many years after his death.
10 Downing Street, London, and 10 Victoria Road, Karachi, are two similarly sounding and important, if not equally important, addresses. One is the official residence of the British Prime Minister, the second served as the official residence of successive Pakistani prime ministers, soon after independence, though it is now just a state guesthouse.
Whether the number 10 here is more than a coincidence should make for an intriguing topic of research, but for today, that is not my concern. I am more interested in Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, who had once lived at the Pakistani number 10.
The six other prime ministers to grace 10 Victoria Road (now known as Abdullah Haroon Road), would be discussed on another occasion.
55ace8fea44a1.jpg

An outside view of number 10 Victoria Road (now known as Abdullah Haroon Road), Karachi. —Photo by Akhtar Balouch
55ace901e1adb.jpg

A plaque, near the gate of number 10 Victoria Road, Karachi, reads “State Guest House”. The address has also been updated to “10-Abdullah Haroon Road, Karachi”. —Photo by Akhtar Balouch
Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy’s term in office was brief, as it was cut short by President Iskander Mirza. It is believed that Mirza was against Suhrawardy’s appointment as prime minister, but halfheartedly approved his name when the political realities confronting him left no other option on the table.
Begum Ikramullah, Suhrawardy's cousin and a highly acclaimed woman in her own right, unveils several episodes – both personal and political – of his life, in Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy: A Biography, published in 1991. Her revelations help us to understand the mayhem of Pakistani politics in the immediate aftermath of independence, and the vendetta that inaugurated the country's chequered political history.
Mirza and Suhrawardy may have had some animosity between them before, but after Suhrawardy's appointment as prime minister, the two men became closer with each other. A glimpse of the thaw in their relationship is found in Pakistan Kay Pehley Saat Wuzra-i-Azam (The First Seven Prime Ministers of Pakistan), a book that puts together the memoirs of Naeem Ahmed Khan, Mohammad Idrees and Abdus Sattar. On page 83-84 it reads:
"Mr Suhrawardy had a penchant for throwing dinner parties. During his days, the prime minister house saw a large number of such events, each of which was attended by 150 to 200 people, who would booze themselves up. However, Suhrawardy, as long as he stayed at the prime minister house, completely abstained from alcohol, following the doctor's advice. Mr Suhrawardy would often take Mrs Iskander Mirza as his dance partner."
Seeing the warmth between the two, it becomes hard to understand why Mirza would coerce a resignation out of Suhrawardy. Detailing the extent of this warmth, Naeem Ahmed Khan et al. describe one particular night when the drinking and dancing stretched on till two in the morning, when Mirza finally decided to get in the car and leave for home.
55ace90b06008.jpg

This 1958 photograph shows Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, Ayub Khan and Mr and Mrs. S.N. Bakar. —Creative Commons.
Suhrawardy was a skillful politician. Jinnah wanted him to join the Muslim League and lead it in Bengal province of the pre-partition India. He lived up to Jinnah's expectations. Besides being one of the busiest politicians, he was a good-humoured and witty man. Kamaal, the renowned film actor of pre-partition India, and later of Pakistan, writes in his autobiography Dastaan-i-Kamaal:
“Karachi was to host the first Presidential Awards ceremony. Perhaps it was last one, too, for the city [as the federal capital was relocated to Islamabad afterwards]. We were affectionately received at Karachi Railway Station and given rooms at Hotel Metropole. Next day, everyone was invited to the President House, and Prime Minister Suhrawardy warmly welcomed the film industry lot. He was a hobbyist photographer and took out his own camera to capture film actors on his personal roll.”
Read on: Flashback: The progressive years

He was also a seasoned lawyer. While pleading cases, he would punctuate his arguments with poetic verses. One such incident occurred when he was defending himself in a case registered under the controversial Elected Bodies Disqualification Order (EBDO). Begum Ikramullah writes:
“His performance in the law courts was ... brilliant. The cases he dealt with became cause celibre(sic), and people used to flock to the court just to listen to him. This was specially so when he was defending himself against the charges under EBDO. The prosecution Consul, Chaudhry Nazir Ahmed was unnecessarily offensive in his cross-examination. For the most part, Shaheed Suhrawardy ignored his deliberate rudeness. Once, however, he made a very apt reply by quoting a line of Ghalib:
Har ek baat pe kahte ho tum keh tuu kyaa hai,
Tum hi kaho ke ye andaaz-i-guftagu kyaa hai

He never derived monetary profits from politics. Instead, he practiced law for a living. Unfortunately, the political vendetta in Pakistan has set a new record with each passing generation. Usually, when a man falls out of favour with those at the helm of affairs, his assets are the first target of the vengeance apparatus, which creates so much trouble that it becomes harder for the outcast to make ends meet.
A similar treatment was meted out to Suhrawardy. Begum Ikramullah writes on page 74 of her cousin’s biography:
“He began to take up his legal practice again. Here also, the Government stooped to incredible meanness. The courts of Karachi and Lahore were directed not to register him as a lawyer. It was the court of the small town of Montgomery, now known as Sahiwal, that registered Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy as a lawyer.”
55ace91536ed4.jpg

Although Suhrawardy was forced to quit as Prime Minister, a group of civil servants was against the move.
They sympathised with Suhrawardy and wanted to present his case in the court of public opinion. Our bureaucracy is infested with officials who swear allegiance to their ruler but switch loyalties as soon as their master's luck runs out.
Take a look: Hypocrites to the core
Suhrawardy, however, had won unwavering devotion from some people in the bureaucracy. One such example is narrated by Begum Salma Ahmed, a well-known politician and businesswoman of the country, in her autobiography. She discusses her maternal-uncle's efforts to support Suhrawardy:
“Aftab Ahmed Khan (Mamoon Sahib) had been principal secretary to Husain Shaheed Suhrawardy, who was prime minister of Pakistan before Iskander Mirza became president. When Ayub Khan took over and declared martial law, a group of civil service officers got together and planned to incite public opinion against the imposition of martial law. They had posters printed which were to be plastered all over Karachi. But before they could do so, the conspiracy was thwarted, the posters confiscated and the ringleaders arrested, prominent among them being Uncle Aftab. Several attempts were made to have him released from jail....”
The most serious allegation that Suhrawardy’s detractors could come up with against him, was that he had joined hands with Mr Gandhi and taken up a joint residence with him in Bengal, where Hindu-Muslim riots had erupted before Partition.
What actually happened was, Gandhi wanted to visit the Noakhali town of pre-partition Bengal – an area worst hit by violence – whereas Suhrawardy feared that his visit would add fuel to the fire. Suhrawardy was of the opinion that Gandhi should stay in Calcutta (now Kolkata) and help quell the violence. Gandhi accepted the proposal on condition that Suhrawardy will also stay with him. The Muslim League leader agreed. Gradually, their combined efforts put out the communal riots.
Begum Ikramullah writes that when she asked Suhrawardy about his experience of living with Gandhi, he replied:
“It was fine, except the food was awful. It helped to reduce the tensions. The Hindus and Muslims of Calcutta came together, even if for just a short period, and the atmosphere began to gradually improve. Eventually, the dawn of freedom arrived August 15, 1947.”
Suhrawardy’s seat in the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan was declared vacant through a resolution which stipulated that anyone who had not taken up residence in Pakistan within six months of the passing of the resolution, would cease to be a member of the Constituent Assembly.
After the resolution was passed, Suhrawardy tried to take up residence in East Pakistan. Begum Ikramullah says he had gone to Dhaka in June 1948, but was served with an expulsion notice within 24 hours of his arrival. The notice was served to him by the IG Zakir Hussain. It not only expelled him from East Pakistan but also prevented his re-entry for another six months.
Pir Mohammad Ali Rashdi, recalling Suhrawardy's services to Pakistan, laments his ordeal in Roodad-i-Chaman, a collection of his columns. He writes on page 51:
“Late Huseyn Suhrawardy was the man who fought his way to bring Bengal on the map of Pakistan; to achieve this objective he got a resolution passed by the Legislators’ Convention. As Chief Minister of United Bengal, he supported and served Muslims during the riots to such a degree that Hindus in Bengal would never put his role out of their minds. Not only this, but for the whole duration of Pakistan Movement, he had been the Secretary-General of Muslim League Bengal and an active member of the Party.”
What became of this man in the years to come?
First, he was declared a “Traitor of Pakistan”, thrown out of the Muslim League and debarred from entering the country.
Then, Pakistan’s Governor-General Ghulam Mohammad, who had been nominated to the post by officialdom, felt himself in dire need of Suhrawardy’s help so that he could give an acceptable garb to his political intrigues. Suhrawardy was summoned from Geneva and appointed Law Minister. Another turn of events saw him as Prime Minister of Pakistan for a few months. Finally, Ayub Khan took over and the same prime minister languished in jail; later, he was disqualified to hold any public office under Elective Bodies Disqualification Order.
Also read: The deleted bits from Fatima Jinnah's 'My Brother'
When injuries to his dignity and the resulting trauma become unbearable, the hurt man left his country for good, preferring death in exile over a return. Recently, a newspaper-interview quoted his daughter, Begum Akhtar Suleman, as saying that Suhrawardy did not die of natural causes, but that the officialdom had him murdered.
55ace99562803.png

Dawn carries the report of Suhrawardy’s death on 6th December 1963.
55ace93b70dd8.jpg

Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy died on 5th December 1963, in a Beirut hotel, where he was living in exile. Rumours about the cause of his death continued to circulate for a long time, while the official statements attributed his demise to a cardiac arrest.
There are an infinite number of political secrets in Pakistan. The secret of Suhrawardy’s death is one of them. It was buried long ago – never to be dug up again.



Akhtar Balouch is a senior journalist, writer and researcher. He is currently a council member of the HRCP. Sociology is his primary domain of expertise, on which he has published several books.

The political victimisation of Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy - Blogs - DAWN.COM
 
. . .
.
.
Suhrawardy was a personal friend of my father. I do not know if it would be proper to write about him. What most Bengalis hold against him was the inaction of the police in Calcutta on Direct Action Day. The truth of the matter is seldom told.
:o::o::o: .. ding ding... we have found someone.. ding ding :buba_phone:
 
.
I
We took it heart as Pakistani but our hope fade away for mistreatment of Bengalis



He is a legend, he was sharp and know what to do, but Bengali identity put him in bad side
I can only apologize but I also know some west pakistanis who were driven out of Bengal and Pakistan's list of billionaires was greatly changed as these rich figures lost their properties in Bengal just like this group of people I know. Pakistan has suffered enough for its mistreatment of Bengalis. We were brothers once and we should have accepted who you voted for. I am sorry for Yahya Khans aggression and Bhuttos power hunger. But do note the biggest victim of the partition or break up of Bengal was us. Ordinary Pakistanis who had no role in the atrocities in Bengal
 
. .
Suhrawardy no Nero, show Bengal files

He was worried that police were called back during riots
TH-30-Suhraward_TH_2565827e.jpg




The secret Cabinet papers released by the West Bengal government have revealed that a week after the Great Calcutta Killings started on August 16, 1946, the third Chief Minister of the undivided Bengal province, Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, raised the issue of riots and claimed that it was the withdrawal of the police during the time of the riots which led the situation to acquire such grim proportions. Suhrawardy was a prominent leader of the All India Muslim League.
“…the main charge was that there was complete withdrawal of the police on Friday [August 16] and Saturday [August 17] … At the meeting on the Maidan, there were no police — mounted or otherwise — and there seemed to be no police arrangements anywhere on the morning of the 16th,” the documents said, quoting the Chief Minister. Suhrawardy’s views were endorsed by the then Ministers of Agriculture and Education in the Cabinet meeting held on August 24, 1946, the first to be held after the riots.
The minutes of the meeting point out that Suhrawardy maintained that the “military was not in fact called too late as alleged in some quarters. They had actually been used at 2 am on the 17th”. He himself had visited the Lalbazaar Police Control Room (the police headquarters) on August 16, the day the riots broke out to see how the situation was developing.
It is estimated that nearly 5,000 people were killed during the Calcutta riots of 1946, which began on August 16 and continued for the next few days. However, historians have a difference of opinion about the actual number of people killed.
During the Cabinet meeting, Suhrawardy kept raising the issue of the riots, while Governor Frederick John Burrows kept insisting that “post-mortems” as to what had happened could be held in a different meeting. During the meeting, government officers said that between “one lakh to two lakh” of displaced persons, rendered homeless by the riots and afraid to return to their dwellings, were receiving relief through 150 centres. The issue of exodus from the city in the wake of riots was raised and it was discussed that “departure from the city of such large number of people ... was likely to result in breakdown of economic life”.
One Minister suggested that the exodus was good as there was a risk of epidemics breaking out in the city, to which Governor Burrows observed that the government should “not encourage people to leave Calcutta”.

Suhrawardy no Nero, show Bengal files - NATIONAL - The Hindu

upload_2015-12-21_14-28-49.png


@Joe Shearer
 
.
Suhrawardy was a personal friend of my father. I do not know if it would be proper to write about him. What most Bengalis hold against him was the inaction of the police in Calcutta on Direct Action Day. The truth of the matter is seldom told.
I would love to read your story. :)

Tagging @Rain Man @scorpionx @Tridibans
 
.
Suhrawardy no Nero, show Bengal files

He was worried that police were called back during riots
TH-30-Suhraward_TH_2565827e.jpg




The secret Cabinet papers released by the West Bengal government have revealed that a week after the Great Calcutta Killings started on August 16, 1946, the third Chief Minister of the undivided Bengal province, Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, raised the issue of riots and claimed that it was the withdrawal of the police during the time of the riots which led the situation to acquire such grim proportions. Suhrawardy was a prominent leader of the All India Muslim League.
“…the main charge was that there was complete withdrawal of the police on Friday [August 16] and Saturday [August 17] … At the meeting on the Maidan, there were no police — mounted or otherwise — and there seemed to be no police arrangements anywhere on the morning of the 16th,” the documents said, quoting the Chief Minister. Suhrawardy’s views were endorsed by the then Ministers of Agriculture and Education in the Cabinet meeting held on August 24, 1946, the first to be held after the riots.
The minutes of the meeting point out that Suhrawardy maintained that the “military was not in fact called too late as alleged in some quarters. They had actually been used at 2 am on the 17th”. He himself had visited the Lalbazaar Police Control Room (the police headquarters) on August 16, the day the riots broke out to see how the situation was developing.
It is estimated that nearly 5,000 people were killed during the Calcutta riots of 1946, which began on August 16 and continued for the next few days. However, historians have a difference of opinion about the actual number of people killed.
During the Cabinet meeting, Suhrawardy kept raising the issue of the riots, while Governor Frederick John Burrows kept insisting that “post-mortems” as to what had happened could be held in a different meeting. During the meeting, government officers said that between “one lakh to two lakh” of displaced persons, rendered homeless by the riots and afraid to return to their dwellings, were receiving relief through 150 centres. The issue of exodus from the city in the wake of riots was raised and it was discussed that “departure from the city of such large number of people ... was likely to result in breakdown of economic life”.
One Minister suggested that the exodus was good as there was a risk of epidemics breaking out in the city, to which Governor Burrows observed that the government should “not encourage people to leave Calcutta”.

Suhrawardy no Nero, show Bengal files - NATIONAL - The Hindu

View attachment 281197

@Joe Shearer

I am pleasantly surprised and taken aback to read this account. This is precisely what happened. The popular myth was that Suhrawardy was in control, he manipulated the police, that he was in the control room continuously from the 16th onwards and prevented the police from moving. The truth was precisely the reverse. There was no bundobast on that date of the Maidan meeting, the 16th, and no presence during the outbreak of the riots that same afternoon. The military was not called in too late, but on the second day of the riots themselves. To the horror of the administration, the soldiers hung around and refused to even step forward to check the killing, some of which happened a few yards away. General Tuker's memoirs tell a completely different story, and it is this very wide difference between the accounts that is of suspicious interest.

Perhaps I will tell the story that my father narrated some day.

I would love to read your story. :)

Tagging @Rain Man @scorpionx @Tridibans

OK, give me a day or two; it is too late now, I think (I just might change my mind), and tomorrow is packed.
 
.
I would love to read your story. :)

Tagging @Rain Man @scorpionx @Tridibans

I couldn't resist, being a garrulous old fool.

My father joined police service in the 40s, and served most of his early years as liaison officer with the military at Cox's Bazaar. He made friends with many officers in the XIV Army - a chicken-curry loving Brigade Major named Cariappa, a Captain named Osmani, among others - but when the war wound down and the Allied troops moved on into south-east Asia, he was posted back at Serampore. In 1946, at the time of the Great Calcutta Killing, when the Muslims attacked the Hindus during Direct Action Day, on the afternoon of August 16, after an inflammatory speech by Suhrawardy at the Calcutta Maidan in the morning, he was posted there but had come down to Calcutta on a personal visit. Reaching that morning, he found the city very quiet, with most attention on the meeting going on at the Maidan. He was surprised to find a lack of bundobast - none of the watchful police presence that the Calcutta Police, in those days a tightly-run force with very high esprit de corps, was famous, even notorious for. No mounted police, no watchful AC with a black Maria, no constables, no motor-cycle Sergeants, nothing. He went to Lalbazar, where he had a friend to meet, and found, to his surprise, a number of officers at the control room. He was told that trouble was expected and everyone was tense about it, but there were 'orders' not to move hastily and not to move without instructions. An hour or so later, having finished his meeting, on his way out, he found the crowd of officers hovering around remained there, but noticeably very tense and under strain. He was told that the CM was there, agitated, and something was going on.

The story that we were all brought up with, from external sources, and part of urban legend, was that Suhrawardy, the CM, had delivered an inflammatory speech that morning, the Muslim League thugs were ready to act on it, and arms had been collected and distributed immediately the speech ended, and rioting broke out on the 16th afternoon. Urban legend further has it that Suhrawardy visited the police control room and ensured that no police intervention happened. My father felt apprehensive about his own beat at Serampore, and hurried back to make sure that nothing happened there as a consequence of trouble in Calcutta.

In those days, all young men who wanted to be in society were members of a night club on Theatre Road known as the 300 Club; there was a sly allusion to the 'upper 300' of Calcutta society in that name. After Serampore, my father was posted as DC South, and came to live as a bachelor, with his parents and brothers, at 2, Loudon Street. The club was a popular place. One evening, there was a disturbance; some Bengali gentlemen had had one too many, and had noticed Suhrawardy there and wanted to inflict corporal punishment on the CM for his role in the riots the previous year. My father intervened, took the somewhat shaken CM out and put him in his car. Suhrawardy, it should be mentioned, was a bon vivant, and loved the good life, and was a very active member of the 300 Club. They became friends, and had a couple of other common friends besides.

It was from Suhrawardy that my father heard, one evening, an embittered version of what had happened on Direct Action Day. There had been a discussion about it with the Governor, who had been informed that a public meeting would be held, and that the Muslim League line would be put forth, in unmistakable terms, and the legitimate demands of the League forcefully reiterated. Suhrawardy was under the impression that given this very broad hint, there would be action taken to heighten the police presence during and after the meeting. To his consternation, after his meeting, when he was leaving, he noticed a distinct lack of police presence. He felt uneasy, and in the afternoon, as his own sources brought in information of Muslim attacks and Hindu retaliation, he went to see for himself what was happening at the control room, the best place to get news of events throughout the city before the days of 24 hour TV broadcasts. At the control room, there was nothing going on, everyone was present listening to phoned-in reports about violence reported here or there, largely, then, in the early afternoon, mainly thugs killing innocent people of the opposite faith, no fighting among armed men as such. His demand for action led to a few vans being despatched to the worst hit areas but no strong police effort. The next day, the 17th, the violence was horrifying. The Sikhs had got involved, and they were bringing in numbers of men, all armed to the teeth, in lorry-loads (General Tuker, then serving at Fort William saw this himself). By that afternoon, Suhrawardy, in his own account, feeling that the situation was spiralling out of control and that the civil administration was no longer in command of the situation, called in the Army. Tuker tells a tale of how the Army intervened and restored law and order, but there are numerous accounts of how the Army would not take action even if there was a killing or a mob gathered in the next street, and only dealt with what was happening in their immediate presence.

While the riots burned themselves out, it left everybody traumatised. There had been no killing on this scale before, and this was to be the model of much violence later. It left Suhrawardy's reputation in tatters, because the police inaction was thought to be his doing, the visit to the control room was seen to be an act of manipulation of the police to allow his side the maximum freedom, and the army being called in early, as early as the second day, in fact, was not mentioned nor seen in people's eyes as action taken by him.

When these conversations took place, it was precisely the time when Suhrawardy was in talks with Sarat Bose and Kiran Shankar Roy about a third way, a Bengal option, whereby Bengal would be a third Dominion, quite apart from Pakistan in the west and India throughout the rest of British India, with no partition. Jinnah knew of this plan and these discussions, and was unhappy but reconciled to dealing with the western portion alone. He had given up on Bengal, more or less. It was at that time that agitated sections in the Bengal Congress put pressure on the Congress working committee, leading to Nehru and Patel intervening, and summoning Bose and Roy to Delhi to scotch all such discussions taking place. According to Suhrawardy, there had been very candid and transparent discussions between the three of them, Suhrawardy himself, Bose and Roy, about the riots, and he had been asked in very great detail about events that had taken place. Again, according to him, he had cleared up his role and his actions to the others, and they were satisfied that he was not responsible for the killing. He was very surprised, and very bitter, that in spite of this, there were elements in the Congress who were intransigent, and demanded a partition of Bengal, insisting that they would not trust Muslims to treat them fairly. That, then, is what happened, and the birth of Bangladesh was postponed by a quarter century, and took place with a truncated Bengal, with the Hindu majority districts out of it.

What never emerged, and what neither Suhrawardy nor my father sought to explore, was the question of the invisible hand. If Suhrawardy was telling the truth, then someone, somewhere, more powerful and influential than the CM, had held back the police, and had held back the Army at a vital time, and had caused a slaughter on a mass scale. Tuker says that it was Army intervention that restored law and order. Eye witnesses say that the Army did precious little. Tuker says that he had reports of Sikhs entering Calcutta in truckloads, with arms, and getting into the riots. The question arises - where were these Sikhs coming from, since the closest centre to Calcutta with a collection of Sikhs, which had its own Sikh population, was Jamshedpur. Could they have been sent distress signals on the 16th, and could they have mobilised and reached the next day?

Postscript: Strangely, there was comparatively less tension during Partition. People have heard about the riots in Calcutta, and about Gandhi's intervention. Those who are reading this account might wonder what personal experiences my father had during that time. He was still the DC (South). The riots were confined to the north of the city, mainly to Beleghata and those parts. The south was unaffected. There was not a single death in the Park Circus area, and there was only minor unrest, no killings, only slogan-shouting, in Metiabruz and Watgunge.

A second post-script: the last time there was any possibility of a meeting between Suhrawardy and my father was in the 50s, when S was then the Prime Minister of Pakistan. My father got a call in his office in Calcutta one day, from a man who identified himself as the ADC to the Prime Minister, to say that the PM had stopped over at Calcutta on his way to Dacca, and wanted my father to join him at lunch at Firpo's (where everybody who was anybody turned up at some time during the week for lunch). He was horrified, and explained as best as he could that this would have to be cleared by his seniors, including possibly a reference to Delhi, and so lunch would not be possible. That was the last time he heard from Suhrawardy.

Partition of Bengal (1947) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
. . .
So it was a very well planned massacre, like Gujarat riot.
@Mike_Brando check it out: post #12.

Gujrat riots well planned? And why would you even mention off topic here. You really can't resist yourself from spewing hatred right?

@Maira La

Claims to be Bangladeshi living abroad, hates India to the core, don't care about Bangladesh, loves Pakistan, don't know Bengali.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom