RE: Mujib is Mussolini by Abed Bahar- Comment By Naser Chowdhury
Monday August 25 2008 21:43:24 PM BDT
By Naser Chowdhury, USA
I understand Mr. Bahar's frustration over the failing of Bangabandhu to live up to the high expectations of his people specifically in the post-independence years. But he is no Mussolini. His foes are the living testimonies to this fact. When Indian intelligence pinpointed the units and the officers in Bangladesh army who had been conspiring to kill him, he did not take action. I sometimes wondered why. While being an undergraduate student in Turkey I found the answer to convince me.
A proposal was put forth to the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid Khan (May Allah be pleased with him) by the Zionist committee at the turn of the last century. The proposal was to secede Palestine from the empire and give it to the Zionists. In exchange all the empires external debts, which were so large that it had to be paid back till the 80's, would be written off and the conspiracies by the British/French (known as the "big game") to break the empire would be put to a stop. A very good deal, or so I thought.
The Sultan's reply was a straight "no" for he had the dignity and self-respect to honor his people. He would not tarnish that dignity by lowering his people specifically at the presence of the foreigners. And so would not Bangabandhu who even before landing on the soil of free Bangladesh made sure that Indian troops be withdrawn in three months time. This is unprecedented in the contemporary world history when compared with Europe after WW2. Had the Gurkha regiment guarded his house with the permanent Indian (de facto Russian) military presence in Bangladesh, would anybody have dared to touch him?
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that Bangabandhu was kept as a prisoner in West Pakistan during the war of liberation. I believe this incident is a direct blessing from Allah. Remember, at the time of his arrest he was the elected Prime Minister of Pakistan – a democratically elected legitimate public figure, not a rebel leader. Moreover, he fought for the establishment of Pakistan being an assistant to Suhrawardy - not united Bengal under India. By arresting him Paki generals found themselves at the losing end – not Bangabandhu. This is the stance of a self-respecting statesman. On the other hand, had he been involved with the day-to-day warfare sitting in India, what would be the post-war situation of the large number of people who were the supporters of united Pakistan or were stranded in West Pakistan or did not voluntarily join the war? Can Mr. Bahar imagine the amount of bloodshed that would have followed the war?
Look at the Soviet/Chinese/Vietnamese examples. Because of his ability to refrain himself from the direct Indian influence during the war he could ask them so bluntly to take their forces back. His personality was not molded to be on the receiving side. As adults and immigrants in foreign lands, we all know it's meaning in verbatim. If we reflect on these matters we will appreciate more of his foresight at the most critical junctures of our country's history and thank Allah more for saving our nation.
For his faults and failures as the political leader in the post-independence years he paid with his hold in the power, his life and the lives of his closest family members and associates. What else could he offer, in this side of his life, to be used as the currency for payment?
Naser Chowdhury, USA
E Mail : naser_c@yahoo.com
A proposal was put forth to the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid Khan (May Allah be pleased with him) by the Zionist committee at the turn of the last century. The proposal was to secede Palestine from the empire and give it to the Zionists. In exchange all the empires external debts, which were so large that it had to be paid back till the 80's, would be written off and the conspiracies by the British/French (known as the "big game") to break the empire would be put to a stop. A very good deal, or so I thought.
The Sultan's reply was a straight "no" for he had the dignity and self-respect to honor his people. He would not tarnish that dignity by lowering his people specifically at the presence of the foreigners. And so would not Bangabandhu who even before landing on the soil of free Bangladesh made sure that Indian troops be withdrawn in three months time. This is unprecedented in the contemporary world history when compared with Europe after WW2. Had the Gurkha regiment guarded his house with the permanent Indian (de facto Russian) military presence in Bangladesh, would anybody have dared to touch him?
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that Bangabandhu was kept as a prisoner in West Pakistan during the war of liberation. I believe this incident is a direct blessing from Allah. Remember, at the time of his arrest he was the elected Prime Minister of Pakistan – a democratically elected legitimate public figure, not a rebel leader. Moreover, he fought for the establishment of Pakistan being an assistant to Suhrawardy - not united Bengal under India. By arresting him Paki generals found themselves at the losing end – not Bangabandhu. This is the stance of a self-respecting statesman. On the other hand, had he been involved with the day-to-day warfare sitting in India, what would be the post-war situation of the large number of people who were the supporters of united Pakistan or were stranded in West Pakistan or did not voluntarily join the war? Can Mr. Bahar imagine the amount of bloodshed that would have followed the war?
Look at the Soviet/Chinese/Vietnamese examples. Because of his ability to refrain himself from the direct Indian influence during the war he could ask them so bluntly to take their forces back. His personality was not molded to be on the receiving side. As adults and immigrants in foreign lands, we all know it's meaning in verbatim. If we reflect on these matters we will appreciate more of his foresight at the most critical junctures of our country's history and thank Allah more for saving our nation.
For his faults and failures as the political leader in the post-independence years he paid with his hold in the power, his life and the lives of his closest family members and associates. What else could he offer, in this side of his life, to be used as the currency for payment?
Naser Chowdhury, USA
E Mail : naser_c@yahoo.com
Source:
REF:
[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.
* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
