Banner Advertise

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

[chottala.com] Killing thy Neighbour: India, and its Border Security Force



 
India, and its Border Security Force
By Rahnuma Ahmed
 

Felani's clothes got entangled in the barbed wire when she was crossing the Anantapur border in Kurigram. It was 6 in the morning, Friday, 7th January 2011. Felani was 15, she worked in Delhi and was returning home with her father after ten years. To get married. She screamed. The BSF shot her dead. They took away her body.

The fence is made of steel and concrete. Packed with razor wire, double-walled and 8-foot high, it is being built by the government of India on its border with Bangladesh. When completed, it promises to be larger than the United States-Mexico fence, Israel's apartheid wall with Palestine, and the Berlin wall put together.  It has been dubbed the Great Wall of India.

The fence is being constructed, with floodlighting in parts, to secure India's borders against interests hostile to the country. To put in place systems that are able to "interdict" these hostile elements. They will include a suitable mix and class of various types of hi-tech electronic surveillance equipment such as night vision devices, handheld thermal imagers, battle field surveillance radars, direction finders, unattended ground sensors, high powered telescopes to act as a "force multiplier" for "effective" border management. According to its rulers, this is "vitally important for national security."

Seventy percent of fencing along the Bangladesh border has been completed. In reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha on November 10, 2010, the Indian state minister for home affairs said, fencing will be completed by March 2012. One estimate puts the project's cost at ₤600 million.

The colonial boundary division between East Pakistan/Bangladesh and India, notes Willem van Schendel, had little to do with modern concepts of spatial rationality. It was anything but a straight line, snaking "through the countryside in a wacky zigzag pattern" showing no respect for history, cutting through innumerable geographical entities, for example, the ancient capital of Gaur. It was reflective of someone with an "excessively baroque mind" (The Bengal Borderland: Beyond state and nation in South Asia, 2005).

The fence divides and separates. Villages. Agricultural lands. Markets. Families. Communities. It cuts across mangrove-swamps in the southwest, forests and mountains in the northeast (Delwar Hussain, March 2, 2009). It divides villages. Everyday village-life must now submit to a tangle of bureaucracy as Indian Muslim law clerk, Maznu Rahman Mandal and his wife Ahmeda Khatun, a Bangladeshi, discovered after Ahmeda's father died. To attend the latter's funeral in the same village, Bhira, they would now have to get passports from Delhi, visas from Kolkata (Bidisha Bannerjee, December 20, 2010). It split up Fazlur Rehman's family too, the fence snaked into their Panidhar village homestead, his younger brother who lived right next door, is now in another country (Time, February 5, 2009). Other border residents have had their homes split in two, the kitchen in one country, the bedroom in another.

To access one's field, or markets, residents must now line up at long queues at the BSF border outposts, surrender their identity cards. They must submit to BSF's regimen, which often means disregarding what the crop needs. As Mithoo Sheikh of Murshidabad says, "The BSF does not understand cultivation problems." By the time we get to the field it is noon. Sometimes we get water only at night. But we have to stop working at 4pm, because they will not let us remain in the field. If we disobey, they beat us, they file false charges. ("Trigger Happy." Excessive Use of Force by Indian Troops at the Bangladesh Border, Human Rights Watch, December 2010).

Felani was killed by the BSF at Kurigram border.

This lack of `understanding' percolates to the topmost levels of both border forces. During an official visit to Bangladesh and talks between the BSF and the BDR (Bangladesh Rifles, recently renamed Border Guard Bangladesh) in September 2010, Raman Srivastava, director general of the BSF, in response to allegations that BSF troopers were killing innocent and unarmed Bangladeshi civilians said: "The deaths have occurred in Indian territory and mostly during night, so how can they be innocent?" Ideas reciprocated by the BDR chief Maj. Gen. Mainul Islam in March 2010, who, while explaining that there was a history of "people and cattle trafficking during darkness" said, "We should not be worried about such incidents [killings]…. We have discussed the matter and will ensure that no innocent people will be killed."

Abdur Rakib was catching fish in Dohalkhari lake, inside Bangladeshi territory. It was March 13, 2009. A witness saw a BSF soldier standing at the border, talking loudly. "It seemed that he wanted the boy to give him some free fish." Heated argument, verbal abuse. "The BSF pointed a gun at the boy. The boy ran and the soldier started to shoot." Two were injured. Rakib was shot in the chest. He died instantly. He was 13.

Smuggling, cattle rustling and human trafficking has increased in the border areas as poor farmers and landless people faced by population increases, poor irrigation, flooding, and continuous river erosion struggle to make ends meet. While both BSF and BGB accuse each other of corruption, the reality, says the recent Human Rights Watch report, is that some officials, border guards, and politicians on both sides are almost certainly involved in smuggling. It quotes a senior BSF official, "There are a lot of people involved, including our chaps. That is why only these farmers, with one or two cows are caught, not groups that ferry large consignments of cattle or drugs."

A culture of impunity prevails, says Kirity Roy, head of Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (Masum), a Kolkata-based human rights organisation. We have repeatedly approached the courts, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), the National Minorities Commission, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights. But none of the cases raised have been brought to a satisfactory conclusion. In some cases, family members appeared before the BSF court of inquiry but we, as the de facto complainant, were never summoned to appear or depose before any inquiry conducted by BSF. No verdicts have been made public.

An Indian Border Security Force (BSF) soldier looks at the body of a suspected intruder shot dead at the site of an alleged encounter on the India-Pakistan border at Mahwa, Atari some 50 kilometers (27 miles) west of Amritsar, India, Wednesday, March 4, 2009. The BSF claimed to have killed a Pakistani intruder, arrested another and seized heroin worth several million rupees in the international market after an exchange of fire early Wednesday. (AP Photo/Altaf Qadri)

Neither has BSF provided any details to Bangladeshi authorities of any BSF personnel having been prosecuted for human rights violation. Impunity is legally sanctioned as the BSF is exempt from criminal prosecution unless specific approval is granted by the Indian government. A new bill to prohibit torture is being considered by the Indian parliament, it includes legal impunity.

On April 22, 2009, when Rabindranath Mandal and his wife were returning to Bangladesh after having illegally gone to India for Rabindranath's treatment, a BSF patrol team from Ghojadanga camp detained them. She was raped. Rabindranath tried to save her, they killed him. The following morning, the BSF jawans left her and her husband's dead body at the Zero Line at Lakkhidari.

The reason for building the fence, said an Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson, is the same as the United States' Mexico fence. As Israel's fence on the West Bank. To prevent illegal migration and terrorist infiltration.

But Rizwana Shamshad points out that the hysteria generated by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during the 1980s and 1990s—Bangladeshi Muslim `infiltration' by the millions constitutes a serious strain on the national economy, it poses a threat to India's stability and security, it represents a challenge to Indian sovereignty, demographic changes will soon lead to Bangladeshi citizens demanding a separate state from India—did not withstand investigation. A study carried out by the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism in 1995 revealed that the BJP-Shiv Sena allegations were not only an exaggeration, but a complete fabrication. Fears and insecurities had been deliberately whipped up to consolidate Hindutva ideology; migrants, it seemed, were more preoccupied with struggling to make a living. While the BJP-Shiv Sena had alleged that there were 300,000 illegal Bangladeshi migrants in Mumbai, they were able to detect and deport only 10,000 Bangladeshi migrants, when in power (1998-2004).

The numbers vary with each media or official report, writes Rizwana. A BJP National Executive meeting declared over 15 million (April 1992). Nearly 10 million, said former Union Home Minister Indrajit Gupta (May 6, 1997). The group of cabinet ministers (home, defence, external affairs, finance) set up by prime minister Vajpayee post-Kargil, reported 15 million (2000). The definitions, she adds, are prejudiced: Muslim migrants are described as `infiltrators.' Hindu migrants as `refugees.' Neither is there any mention of the Indian economy having benefited from cheap labour.

The HRW report notes, few killed by the BSF have ever been shown to have been involved in terrorism. In the cases investigated, alleged criminals were armed with nothing but sickles, sticks and knives, implements commonly carried by villagers. Nor do the dead bodies bear out BSF's justification that they had fired in self-defense. Shots in the back indicate that the victims had been shot running away. Shots at close range signal they were probably killed in custody.

BSF kills Indian nationals too. In Indian territory. Basirun Bibi and her 6 month old grandson Ashique, May 2010. Atiur Rahman, March 2010. Shahjahan Gazi, November 2009. Noor Hossain, September 2009. Shyamsundar Mondal, August 2009. Sushanta Mondal, July 2009. Abdus Samad, May 2009. The imposition of informal curfews on both sides of the border at night, reportedly to prevent the accidental shooting of villagers, has not lessened the number of innocent people killed.

Beatings, torture, rape, killings. What could be the reason for such compulsively violent behaviour? According to the HRW report, it could have been caused by previous deployment in the Indo-Pakistan border in Kashmir, by "difficult and tense periods of duty."

However, checkpoints, curfews, hi-tech electronic surveillance equipment, harassment, intimidation, beatings, torture and sniper fire remind me of Gaza. Not surprising, given that once finished, the fence will "all but encircle Bangladesh" (Time, February 5, 2009).

The 1947 colonial border division was reflective of someone with an "excessively baroque mind." Its brutal enforcement through fencing, through the deployment of trigger happy BSF soldiers, speak of a Nazi-state mentality.

Not too far-fetched given Israel and India's "limitless relationship" (Military Ties Unlimited. India and Israel, New Age, January 18, 2010). This includes Israeli training of Indian commandos in urban warfare and counter-insurgency operations (in Kashmir), and proposals for offering the Border Security Forces specialised training.
Given Israel's behaviour, which Auschwitz survivor, Hajo Meyer, likens to the Nazis. "
I can write up an endless list of similarities between Nazi Germany and Israel."

Israel's inability to learn to live with its neighbours is increasingly turning it into a "pariah state" (British MP). Its "paranoia" has been noted by Israelis themselves (Gideon Levy). That a similar future awaits India, is increasingly clear.

Published in New Age, Monday December 10, 2011

This entry was posted on Monday, January 10th, 2011 at 8:22 pm and is filed under Bangladesh, Global Issues, Rahnuma Ahmed, South Asia, human rights, politics, security, terrorism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


__._,_.___


[* 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

__,_._,___

[chottala.com] JINNAH'S ANTI-BANGALEE DESIGN ....................

I agree with Syed.

--- In chottala@yahoogroups.com, Syed_Aslam3 <Syed.Aslam3@...> wrote:
>
> Mister Ataul Karim
>
> Amazing ! Still there are few Jinnah lovers in Bangladesh !!!.....
>
> What so good about your Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah ?
> No wonder BJP appreciates your Mohammad Ali Jinnah !!!!
>
> FYI, contrary to the common belief that Jinnah originated the two-nation
> theory, actually it was Savarkar who propounded the theory years before the
> Muslim League embraced the idea. Savarkar had commanded all the Muslims to
> leave ‘Bharat’ to pave the way for the establishment of Hindu Rashtra. When
> Jinnah introduced his two-nation theory, Savarkar announced, “I have no
> quarrel with Mr. Jinnah’s two-nation theory… It is a historical fact that
> Hindus and Muslims are two nations.” [Savarkar is the idological Guru of
> today's BJP]
>
> As far as I understand Netaji Subash Chandra Bose chose a historically wrong
> path :
> "Enemy's Enemy is my friend" ....and at the end he joined racist
> Nazi-Japanease axis
> to liberate an "Akhand India" which ended in a fiasco for his line of
> actions ....
>
> You ask others to migrate to India (Hindustan) and become a hindustani.
>
> FYI, the birth of Bangladesh is a direct proof of the failure of the Two
> nation
> theory (muslims are one nation) on which the Pakistan movement led by Jinnah
>
> relied upon. The historical blunder was corrected by a historical process
> that
> ended in the liberation Bangladesh .....definitely from Jinnah's
> Anti-Bangalee Design ...
>
> We are Bangladeshis and live in our People's Republic of Bangladesh that
> we have achieved by giving blood through a liberation war against the *
> Islamic* Republic
> of Pakistan. The Jinnah lovers should migrate and live in Pakistan just
> like what Mahmood Ali (Sylhet) gong have done. ......Evidently, there are
> few
> hidden Pakistani still living in Banglasesh (Alas .!!!!)
>
> Mr. Karim you say "little knowledge is dangerous". just think it may very
> well apply to you ....
> The partition of India didn't solve the problems of Indian Muslims .....
> It is still a country with nearly 160 Million muslims .... The Muhazir
> Muslims in Pakistan have a very bitter feeling as expressed by the speech of
>
> MQM leader Altaf about the partition, inspite of the fact they made maximum
>
> sacrifice for Jinnah Miah's Pakistan ......
>
> Just wait, the further disintegration of Pakistan is in the offing ..... it
> will happen in our life-time ....
> Read:
>
> http://www.cfr.org/publication/23744/pakistans_road_to_disintegration.html
> *Pakistan's Road to Disintegration*
>
> Thanks for your patience ...
>
> Syed Aslam
>
> PS: Our great poet Kazi Nazrul Islam called Pakistan would be a Fakistan
> in late nineteen thirties when the movement was started by Muslim Leagew.
> ..... In reality it has happened : Pakistan has proved itself to be a
> Fakistan
> all way through it's exixtence over and over again, again and again ....
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Ataul Karim <ataulkarim49@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Dear All
> > It is really interesting to read all the comment about Jinnah.
> > Few things i would like to ask, if Jinnah was a agent of the British then
> > how come Neheru had an illicit affair with Edwina Mountbatten?
> > Why Mohondas Karamchand Gandhi And Nehru did not like Netaji and through
> > him out of congress? Why Bharat Ratna title was given to Netaji after Rajiv
> > Gandhi was given? Netaji's family refused to accept the title. When Indira
> > Gandhi was assainated Pronob Mukharjee was not made the prime minister, he
> > was the finance minister at that time. As per parliamentary form of
> > government the finance minister holds the
> > number two position, instead of him Rajiv Gandhi was made PM, who was not
> > even a member of the cabinet . Even today Sonia Gandhi did not make
> > Mukharjee the prime minister, instead she picked a technocrat punjabi as the
> > prime minister. My question is who are the bengali
> > haters?
> > If you really think the division of India was wrong then you are at liberty
> > to migrate to India (Hindustan) and become a hindustani.
> >
> > Please read Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah. He is a member of Lok Sabah and
> > also a member of BJP.
> > Mr. Syed Aslam only thing i can say about you is "little knowledge is
> > dangerous".
> >
> > Ataul Karim
> > (Free Thinker)
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > *From:* abid bahar <abid.bahar@...>
> > *To:* chottala@yahoogroups.com; notun Bangladesh <
> > notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com>; abid bahar <abid.bahar@...>;
> > Ovimot@yahoogroups.com; ban yah <banglarnari@yahoogroups.com>; Bangla
> > Zindabad <Bangladesh-Zindabad@yahoogroups.com>
> > *Sent:* Tue, January 11, 2011 12:57:08 PM
> > *Subject:* Re: [chottala.com] JINNAH'S ANTI-BANGALEE DESIGN
> > ....................
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Syed_Aslam3 <Syed.Aslam3@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> A Horrible story telling by one calls himself Syed Aslam?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> > What a story telling by a man or a woman who keeps his real name secret!
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >> What kind of story telling is this Mr. Ghost?Why do I have to remind
> >>> you to give us your real name and the name of your employer? Why shall I
> >>> listen to you and your confused Bhariotio story about Jinnah when I can
> >>> listen to Dr. Wahiduzzaman who is a very close friend of mine.We talk to
> >>> each other almost every other day.You are lowering his own credibility by
> >>> misrepresenting him. He himself wouldn't agree with your Gosh's
> >>> Ghost writing, Ok?I have seen many India-lovers, who use their names and I
> >>> respect them but I haven't seen one like you a self proclaimed historian! Mr.
> >>> Gosh, I still have your record that you had been using several names to win
> >>> a debate.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >> Remember, historians are not cheats rather they are required to
> >>> intellectually honest people who use their supportng documents to prove
> >>> their points. Dr. Wahiduzzman is an example of a historian. Heed to this and
> >>> learn from his presentation before you make any more shameless attempt to
> >>> present yourself as a historian. If we know who you are, I will definitely
> >>> read your lines to understand what you have to say. My request to you,
> >>> before you give us your real identity please stop talking nonsense.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >> Mr. Amin Chaudhury
> >>
> >> Jinnah did not create Pakistan ..... He worked on behalf of the British
> >> (behind the scene) in their grand "Diivide and Rule" scheme During
> >> nineteen forties
> >> it was obvious that Britain's colonial chain that spread across the globe
> >> is falling
> >> apart .... Obviously, British gave a "homeland" for the muslims of India
> >> [the other
> >> homeland is Israel where the Arabs were kicked out from their ancestorial
> >> land
> >> of Palestine).
> >>
> >> Muslim League's movement was Pakistan movement, not reallly an
> >> independence
> >> movement ....I, on 14th August 1947 Jinnah became the Governor General of
> >> Pakistan,
> >> represnting the Queen of England and died as such .......
> >>
> >> Mr. Amin, your personalized comments are out of context and are results of
> >> your
> >> shallow and superficial understanding of the historical processes. The
> >> history's path is
> >> zikzak, but the net direction is always forward: The history corrects
> >> itself in it's own
> >> unique way: The emmegence of Bangladesh through our liberation war is a
> >> march farward
> >> in the correct direction and a direct proof of failure of the doctrine
> >> espoused by Jinnah
> >> that "muslims of India constitute one nation"
> >>
> >> The video "Partition of India was a blunder" expresses the feeling of the
> >> Mohazirs of
> >> Pakistan (the muslims who migrated from India) about how fraustrated they
> >> are even
> >> if they made great sacrifices for Pakistan......in return they got nothing
> >> .....
> >> It is essentially a menifestation of the failure of religion based two
> >> nation theory.
> >>
> >> You said "You are propagating akhand India" ......where did you find that
> >> ....?.
> >> You have uttered quite a few bull-shits and personal attacks ......A true
> >> freedom
> >> fighter never uses obscene words and slangs in discussions and analysis of
> >> history.
> >>
> >> To start with Mr. Waheeduzzaman Manik's article "THE IMPACT OF
> >> JINNAH'S ANTI-BANGALEE DESIGN ON THE POLITICAL SCENE OF
> >> BANGLADESH IN THE EARLY YEARS OF PAKISTAN: AN ASSESSMENT "
> >> is one such historical analyis. If you disagree give your counter points.
> >> Jamaat's role came into the discussion, when a Jamaati intellectual
> >> asserted
> >> Mr. Waheeduzzaman's analysis of Jinnah's Anti-Bangali design as malicious
> >> propaganda.
> >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/khabor/message/33451
> >> You have said "If there would not be Pakistan there would not be
> >> Independent
> >> Bangladesh." By the same token, if there is no British colinial rule of
> >> India, there
> >> would be no Pakistan per se. and consequently there would be no Bangladesh
> >> as we see today. You should thank British and appreciate traitor Mir Jafor
> >> Ali Khan
> >> who betrayed nation for his personal opportunism and gave British foothold
> >> in Bengal.
> >> Just like you are appreciating Jinnah now.
> >>
> >> What you are in your personal life and background is irrelevant in the
> >> current discussion.
> >> I am not against any religion. I am against use of religion in politics,
> >> be it Islam, Hindutva,
> >> Christianity, Judaism or any other religion. I also think that two nation
> >> theory promated by
> >> Jinnah has failed the test of time: To you, this may "amounts to
> >> treason".
> >> [Shera Bangla AK Fazlul Haque, Maulana Bhashani, Sheikh Mujib all were
> >> called
> >> traitors by pro-Jinnah vested establishment of Pakistan at different
> >> times]
> >>
> >> You are at liberty to think in your way ...... In historical sequence of
> >> events, Akhand
> >> Pakistan preceeds the Liberation of occupied Bangladesh ...... that does
> >> not absolve
> >> Jinnah who perpetuated his anti-Bangalee design with the help of his
> >> cronies like
> >> Nazimudin, Nurul Amin et el .... Our nation, currently Bangladsesh became
> >> subjugated
> >> by the ruling junta of Pakistan. Have trust in the people of our land,
> >> Bangladesh has
> >> happened and it's a reality ..... Bangladesh would have happen, no matter
> >> what path it
> >> would have taken ...... Suhrawarddyy's idea of Sovereign Republic of
> >> Bengal was a viable option in 1946-47 was reasonable option and would have
> >> been lot less costly
> >> (loss of life and uprooting of people wise) than Jinnah's path that had a
> >> initial success,
> >> but failed the test of time .... We got Bangladesh in a very hard way
> >> through a very torturous
> >> path [Liberation war in one side mass-rape genocide by Pak Army and it's
> >> collaborators
> >> on the other]
> >>
> >> Syed Aslam
> >>
> >> **
> >> *On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:53 AM, amin chaudhury <
> >> amin_chaudhury@...> wrote:
> >> *
> >>>
> >>> The only good about Quaid E Azam is that he created Pakistan which
> >>> allowed us to gain independence.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder how could you be at times appearing so good in argument, so
> >>> learned ! Now I understand those were your camouflage.
> >>>
> >>> If there would remain your dream homeland Akhond Bharat Bangladesh would
> >>> never be independent. You who still today say Partition of India was a
> >>> blunder you accept that it was not wise to gain independence of Bangladesh.
> >>> You are propagating akhand India. I am a freedom fighter. If someday I get
> >>> you close that will be your very bad day. Find home in India. Look at West
> >>> Bengal, still dying under Hindi. If it would be in India the mother language
> >>> would be Hindi. There would never be any language movement, leave aside
> >>> independence.
> >>>
> >>> I see ! Now you are speaking the language of Jamat, the Razakars. Are you
> >>> and your friends mothers were concubines of Jamatis. I don’t think so. Only
> >>> the concubines of jamat Razakar say that Partition of India was a blunder. !
> >>> What do you think, we freedom fighters are all dead !
> >>> What if Jamat did not want Pakistan ? It matters to you not me. If there
> >>> would not be Pakistan there would not be Independent Bangladesh.
> >>> Dare to say in front of public that it was better to be under India than
> >>> gain independent Bangladesh ?
> >>>
> >>> Mr. Aslam, come to sense. I lost my 23 family members in Liberation war,
> >>> 9 of them by the Pakistani army while attacking our village. Their only
> >>> fault was the camp of Muktijoddhas was in our house. The rest died in front
> >>> fight.
> >>>
> >>> When you say Partition of India was a blunder you deny independent
> >>> Bangladesh. This amounts to treason.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --- On *Fri, 1/7/11, Syed_Aslam3 <Syed.Aslam3@...>* wrote:
> >>> From: Syed_Aslam3 <Syed.Aslam3@...>
> >>> Subject: [notun_bangladesh] Re:[KHABOR] JINNAH'S ANTI-BANGALEE DESIGN
> >>> -..... ..
> >>> Date: Friday, January 7, 2011, 5:56 AM
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *What so good about your Quaide Azam ? *
> >>> *Did Jamaat support **Jinnah and rolled behind him when he was leading *
> >>> *Pakistan movement **in Nineteen Forties?*
> >>> **
> >>> *Jamaatis are now calling the wine-shipping, pork-eating Jinnah the **"greatest
> >>> muslim leader of twentieth **century in the subcontinent" ! *
> >>> *Did Maulana Maududi recognize that in his life-time????*
> >>> *In any case, what you are trying to justfy with your propaganda jargon?
> >>> *
> >>> *There was no malicious intent in Waheeduzzaman Manik's article.*
> >>> *It was an objective analysis from Bangladesh's national point of view.*
> >>>
> >>> *The historical processes are not as **Black and White as you try to
> >>> portray **through your innuendoes...... During N**inteen Forties, the Mu
> >>> **sulmans of **eastern part of India (Bengal & Assam ) supported the
> >>> creation of **Pakistan **with great hopes, The Sylhet Referendum **held
> >>> in July 1947 is a direct proof **of mass support for Pakistan among the
> >>> **Musulmans in favor of joining Pakistan.*
> >>>
> >>> *Albeit, a very persistent illusion about the "Muslim homeland"
> >>> overwhelmed the minds **of the of the ordinary Musulmans in
> >>> 1946-1947..... Soon after the Partition of India, many people on the **both
> >>> sides of border got uprooted from their ancestorial homes ..*
> >>> *..*
> >>> *Gradually, the people started getting disillusioned, through various
> >>> historical **events and processes that culminated in the Liberation of
> >>> Bangladesh.*
> >>> *Sheikh Mujibur Rahman could not have been an exception. He was a part*
> >>> *of the process .... He was always with the masses: national crisis
> >>> produces*
> >>> *leaders who are able to lead the people in their struggle against
> >>> injustice and*
> >>> *deprrivation ..... The mind of a true leader of the masses reflects the
> >>> minds *
> >>> *of the people: Sheikh Mujib is the only such leader in our history ...*
> >>> *The people did not support and joined the liberation war just by
> >>> hearing someone's*
> >>> *radio announcement in English ...... the people became ready to fight
> >>> against*
> >>> *the occupation through a historical process of which Mujib was part and
> >>> percel....*
> >>> *and at the end he was holding the helm .. Sheikh Mujib was always with*
> >>> *the people of our land, he learned from the masses then led the masses
> >>> ....*
> >>> *in their struggle for autonomy which eventually turned into our
> >>> liberation war.*
> >>> *.*
> >>> *The same people that supported the creation of Pakistan in 1947
> >>> ......gave*
> >>> *their blood for the liberation of Bangladesh from the yoke of Pakistan
> >>> in 1971.*
> >>> *Just think, how your Quaide Azam's two nation theory failed to
> >>> withstand the*
> >>> *test of time ........!!!!!!!!!!!*
> >>>
> >>> *Syed Aslam*
> >>> **
> >>> *Related:*
> >>> Maulana Maududi’s Role Against Jinnah’s Pakistan<http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=46661742857&topic=10800>
> >>> *
> >>> http://pakteahouse.net/2009/08/15/maulana-maududis-role-against-jinnahs-pakistan/
> >>> *
> >>> ** <http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=46661742857&topic=10800>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> * PS: Watch the YouTube videos:*
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *Partition of India* a Blunder - Altaf Hussain
> >>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMSVYTgFIPA>
> >>> [image: Thumbnail]
> >>>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMSVYTgFIPA
> >>>
> >>> *Partition of India* was a Blunder in the history of mankind
> >>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOHnvR6ywS0>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [image: Thumbnail] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOHnvR6ywS0>
> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOHnvR6ywS0
> >>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOHnvR6ywS0> The nation of Pakistan was
> >>> never meant to be an "Islamic" state by Jinnah, as per all his speehes
> >>> pre and post partition, Yes it was made for Muslims but not an Islamic one,
> >>> and to equate the two is utterly rubbish. Describing the complexity of
> >>> Jinnah's personality, one journalist observed that "General Mohammad
> >>> Zia-ul-Haq (Pakistan's dictator from 1977 to 1988) must be a very relieved
> >>> man that Jinnah the "father of Pakistan is not alive today --- or he would
> >>> have to be flogged publicly for his personal habits . Mr. Jinnah not only
> >>> chain smoked Cravan-A cigarettes but also liked his whisky and was not
> >>> averse to pork. His was a life of upper-class liberal --- which indeed
> >>> Jinnah was for most of his life both private and public ..."
> >>>
> >> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:04 PM, *S A Hannah <
> >> sahannan@...<http://mc/compose?to=sahannan@...>
> >> >* wrote:
> >>
> >> Even Sheikh Mujibur Rahman sahib was respectful of Mr Jinnah.Sheikh sahib
> >> used to call him Quaide Azam.When he was member of National Assembly of
> >> Pakistan in 1957-58 he said, in his speech in Parliament on the transfer
> >> capital from Karachi to Islamabad.
> >>
> >> Sheikh sahib *said we will not allow any body to transfer capital from
> >> Karachi as Karachi was made capital by Quaide Azam*.
> >>
> >> Please read Independence of Bangladesh Documents, volume 2, published by
> >> GOB . See the entries under 1957-58, also see the proceedings of National
> >> Assembly of Pakistan.
> >>
> >> Shah Abdul Hannan
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> *From:* khabor@yahoogroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=khabor@yahoogroups.com>[mailto:
> >> khabor@yahoogroups.com <http://mc/compose?to=khabor@yahoogroups.com>] *On
> >> Behalf Of *Syed_Aslam3
> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 05, 2011 7:56 AM
> >> *To:* notun Bangladesh; Khobor; chottala@yahoogroups.com<http://mc/compose?to=chottala@yahoogroups.com>;
> >> Sonar Bangladesh
> >> *Subject:* [KHABOR] JINNAH'S ANTI-BANGALEE DESIGN ON THE POLITICAL SCENE
> >> OF BANGLADESH IN THE EARLY YEARS OF PAKISTAN: AN ASSESSMENT......
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Mr. Amin Chaudhury*
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *Does it hurt you when Jinnah is exposed ?*
> >>
> >> *How come you omitted Suhrawarddy's name? , Suhrawarddy was the main **proponent
> >> of United Bengal Movement. Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawarddy, the then **Premier
> >> of the province of Bengal, formally launched his idea of a sovereign
> >> state *
> >>
> >> *for undivided Bengal. Almost simultaneously Sarat Chandra Bose came
> >> forward with **his proposal for a Sovereign Socialist Republic of
> >> Bengal. On the eve of the 1947 *
> >>
> >> *partition Suhrawardy envisioned the establishment of a independent state
> >> in **Eastern India comprising the whole of Bengal and Assam and the
> >> adjoining **districts of Bihar.*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Sarat Bose visualised Bengal to be a sovereign socialist republic within
> >> the Indian union. Suhrawarddy and Sarat Bose both vehemently protested the
> >> move for the *
> >>
> >> *partition of Bengal, initiated by most Congress and Hindu Mahasabha
> >> leaders of **the province. *
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *On the other hand many Hindu and Muslim leaders of Bengal supported
> >> Suhrawardy **and Sarat Bose in their move. Prominent among them were
> >> Kiran Shankar Roy *
> >>
> >> *(Leader of the Congress Parliamentary Party in Bengal Assembly), Satya
> >> Ranjan **Bakshi (Sarat Bose's Secretary), Abul Hashim (Secretary of the
> >> Bengal Provincial *
> >>
> >> *Muslim League), Fazlur Rahman (Revenue Minister of the Province, father
> >> of **Beximco's Salman F Rahman), Mohammad Ali Chowdhury (Finance Minister
> >> in **Suhrawardy's cabinet) and others. Khawja Nazimuddin ( then an
> >> influential *
> >>
> >> *member of the working committee of Bengal as well as of All India Muslim
> >> league) *
> >>
> >> *and Maulana Mohammad Akram Khan (President of Bengal Muslim League) were
> >> the **exponents of the partition of Bengal on communal basis..*
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *Jinnah never supported sovereign state for undivided Bengal (Greater
> >> Independent **Bengal) He wanted Bengal and Assam as part of Akhand
> >> Pakistan. Where do **you find Moulana Bhashani worked for sovereign
> >> independent Bengal ?*
> >>
> >> *He was elected as member of Assam provincial Assembly and wanted the **
> >> Assam** to be a part of Pakistan along with Bengal.*
> >>
> >> *[with all due respect to Maulana Bhashani]*
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *At the time when Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawarddy,launched his idea of a
> >> sovereign **Bengal, Sheikh Mujib, then a student leader (Nikhil Bharat
> >> Muslim Chhatra *
> >>
> >> *Federation ) was one of his associates in the student front. [Please
> >> read Amar **Jibon by Badruddin Umar. Incidently, Badruddin Umar is a son
> >> of Abul Hashim **mentioned by you. Abul Hashim was the Secretary of the
> >> Bengal Provincial Muslim **League]. Abul Hashim also participated in the
> >> United Bengal Movement in 1947, a **movement which was opposed by his
> >> party the Muslim League. FYI, Abul Hashim*
> >>
> >> *never used the word "Allama" in front of his name.[ He was never a
> >> self-proclaimed Allama like Saidee et. el]*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *You are right the establishment of Independent Sovereign undivided
> >> Bengal **would Bengal would have been "the most progressive and
> >> prosperous country **with Hindu and Muslims living together." *
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *There were opposition to the Suhrawarddy's & Sarat Bose's United Bengal
> >> **Movement on the both side of the communal aisle. Deep inside, the
> >> Hindu **communalism is no different from that of parochialism within
> >> muslim *
> >>
> >> *community. The apparent antagonists help each other in practice.*
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *The communalists anong the Hindus and narrow parochialists and
> >> extreemists **that exists wiithin Muslim community are two opposites of
> >> the same fecal **matter (shit/dung). They just wear different cloaks
> >> (lebash).*
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *Thanks*
> >>
> >> * *
> >>
> >> *Syed Aslam*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Please Read:*
> >>
> >>
> >> *Amara Jibana: 1931-1950** *<http://www.bookfinder.com/dir/i/Amara_Jibana-1931-1950/9848391355/>
> >> by *Badruddin Umar *
> >> Hardcover, Sahityika, ISBN 9848391355 (984-8391-35-5)
> >>
> >> *Also read:*
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [image: [<SPAN]amarpita.jpg]> <http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_BFt8XULt1w0/SthPwObGiqI/AAAAAAAAACg/y6yhAWYO8JQ/s1600-h/amarpita.jpg>The
> >> book is replete with things anecdotal. *Abul Hashim*’s assessment of
> >> Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy is not exactly flattering to the latter. It was
> >> his belief that when Suhrawardy, almost in the manner of the dramatic,
> >> argued for an independent, united Bengal in the run-up to partition, he did
> >> so out of the fear that in Pakistan he would have no place in politics. At
> >> the Delhi session of the Muslim League in April 1946, Mohammad Ali Jinnah
> >> presented a proposal for the creation of a single Pakistan state, a position
> >> that contravened the Lahore Resolution of March 1940 where the concept of
> >> independent states (meaning two) for India’s Muslims had been enunciated.
> >> When Hashim drew Jinnah’s attention to ‘states’ rather than ‘state’, the
> >> future father of Pakistan suggested that the absence of the letter ‘s’ had
> >> been a printing error. Hashim then asked Liaquat Ali Khan to read out the
> >> 1940 resolution. It was soon revealed that the resolution had actually
> >> spoken of ‘states’ instead of the single ‘state’ Jinnah was now harping on.
> >> In the end, though, it was Jinnah who called the shots. A single Pakistan
> >> was established. The results could not but be disastrous. [*Syed Badrul
> >> Ahsan]*
> >>
> > *On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:10 PM,* *amin chaudhury <
> > amin_chaudhury@... <http://mc/compose?to=amin_chaudhury@...>>*
> > wrote:
> >
> > Why suppress the fact that Allama Abul Hashim, Moulana Bhashani, Sarat Bose
> > (Brother of Netaji Shubhash Chandra Bose raised Independent Bengal
> > proposition. Gandhi, Jwaherlal Patel and other Hindu leaders opposed it
> > tooth and nail. Jinnah gave it a green signal. But he knew that the Hindus
> > will not accept the proposition. Had the Hindus accepted it Bengal would be
> > the most progressive and prosperous country with Hindu and Muslims living
> > together. Hindus are the real Anti _bangalee people. Look at West Bengal,
> > still a slave of India. It is India's anti- banglaee position that did not
> > accept Jyoti Bose as PM of India. Bangla as a language is gradually waning
> > under the ruthless onslaught of Hindi. If Bangladesh (the then East Bengal)
> > would remain under India would India accept its independence ? Look at the
> > seven sister states, people are fighting for independence but getting
> > bullets in stead. Is not that atrocity ? Is not that genocide ?
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On *Sun, 1/2/11, Syed_Aslam3 <Syed.Aslam3@...<http://mc/compose?to=Syed.Aslam3@...>
> > >* wrote
> >
> > *THE IMPACT OF JINNAH'S ANTI-BANGALEE DESIGN ON THE POLITICAL SCENE OF
> > BANGLADESH IN THE EARLY YEARS OF PAKISTAN: AN ASSESSMENT * *By M.
> > Waheeduzzaman Manik*
> >
> > Dr. M. Waheeduzzaman Manik writes from Tennessee, USA. His email address
> > is: MWzaman@... <http://mc/compose?to=MWzaman@...>
> >
> > *The movement for a separate homeland for the Muslims of Indian
> > subcontinent had reached its pinnacle with the emergence of Pakistan as an
> > independent nation-state on August 14, 1947. Mohammad Ali Jinnah was the
> > greatest exponent of Two-Nation Theory and the most articulate champion of
> > Pakistan movement. He was called the Quai-I-Azam (the Great Leader) for his
> > pivotal role in the creation of Pakistan. Jinnah's relentless efforts for
> > carving out a separate Muslim homeland made him the sole spokesman of the
> > Indian Muslims in mid-1940s. He has been called both the "Creator" and
> > "Founder" of Pakistan. The Muslim League, under Jinnah's leadership, had
> > successfully mobilized and enlisted Bangalee Muslim masses throughout the
> > province of Bengal in favor of Pakistan movement. It is a verified fact
> > that out of 100 million Muslim populations in British-India, 33 million were
> > from Bengal province. The leaders of Bengal Provincial Muslim League (BPML)
> > were among the vanguards that had spearheaded the Pakistan Movement. *
> >
> > *Although the overwhelming number of Muslim population in Bengal had
> > supported the Muslim League's demand for Pakistan, the central leadership of
> > All-India Muslim League (AIML) was disproportionately skewed in favor of
> > non-Bengali leaders of different provinces. Jinnah had effectively used
> > most of the popular leaders of Bengal for the purpose mobilizing support in
> > favor of his "Two-Nation Theory" and the demand for separate homeland for
> > the Muslims of India. *
> >
> > *Yet, Jinnah had preferred to promote and project the non-Bengali
> > loyalists, rightists and collaborationists in the leadership roles at both
> > AIML and Bengal Provincial Muslim League (BPML). It was by his deliberate
> > anti-Bengali design that most of the celebrated and popular Muslim League
> > leaders of Bengal were either banished or marginalized immediately before or
> > **
> > after the creation of Pakistan. Instead of fostering and nurturing
> > charismatic and independent-minded Bengali leaders, Jinnah handpicked those
> > leaders of Bengal to assume the leadership roles in East Bengal (now
> > Bangladesh) who were certified as anti-Bangalee and spineless loyalists or
> > collaborationists. Thus the dice of Pakistan's anti-Bengali design was cast
> > even before Pakistan's independence was achieved.
> >
> > The seed of colonial mode of governance in East Bengal (East Pakistan) was
> > planted by Jinnah, the Founder of Pakistan. The genesis of the
> > disintegration of Pakistan and Bangalees' relentless struggle first for
> > maximum autonomy and later for complete independence were, to a great
> > extent, conditioned by Jinnah's quest for installing anti-Bangalee
> > collaborationist and rightist Muslim Leaguers in both the party apparatus
> > and Governmental structure of East Bengal (throughout this commentary, I
> > have used East Pakistan and East Bengal interchangeably or synonymously with
> > reference to the geographic area that emerged as Bangladesh on December 16,
> > 1971). *
> >
> > *Lest it be thought that this writer is overstating the fact! Yet, the
> > following verifiable facts will lend credence to my generalizations on
> > Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Founding Father of Pakistan.*
> >
> > *After the passage of the Lahore Resolution (known as Pakistan Resolution)
> > on March 23, 1940, the moribund Bengal Provincial Muslim League (BPML)
> > started emerging as the mass organization for the first time. With the
> > popularity of Pakistan Movement, Jinnah's grip over AIML and BPML was also
> > getting tighter. There are some scholars who have attributed the popularity
> > of Pakistan movement in Bengal to Jinnah's "personal popularity" and
> > "organization skills." There are observers who have asserted that "religious
> > zeal" had prompted the millions of people to support Pakistan Movement.
> > There are also writers who have singled out the alleged or perceived
> > "Congress mis-rule" to be the determining factor that forced the Bengali
> > Muslims to support the demand for Pakistan. There is no doubt that these
> > explanations might sound intuitively pleasing or plausible. However, such
> > claims might sound fantastic but not realistic at all. *
> >
> > *Yet, these superfluous claims or assertions lack credibility. Although
> > there was religious fervor in Pakistan movement from the beginning to the
> > end, the magnitude and extent of "Islamic solidarity" of Bengali Muslims
> > differed substantially from the Muslims of North and North-Western provinces
> > of India. There is no doubt that religion had played a clear role in the
> > process of creating or developing a sense of "Islamic Creed" or "Muslim
> > Solidarity" among the Bangalee Muslims during the movement for Pakistan.
> > However, there is no reason to subscribe to the idea that "Islam" was the
> > "only" factor or consideration that united the Muslims in Bengal behind
> > Pakistan movement. In fact, there were dominant factors other than
> > "religion" that motivated the Bangalee Muslims to lend their overwhelming
> > support to Muslim League's demand for Pakistan. The Muslims in Bengal were
> > more pragmatists or a rationalists than religionists. The truth of the
> > matter is that after the adoption of Lahore Resolution on March 23, 1940,
> > the Muslim masses started to believe genuinely that they might achieve an
> > independent Muslim nation-state provided they vigorously support the
> > movement for the establishment of Pakistan. The rising Muslim middle class
> > found the demand for Pakistan more attractive or prospective option for
> > their own personal and professional growth. Their dreams of securing jobs
> > in both public and private sectors, and their strong desires for succeeding
> > in business enterprises in an independent Muslim State, were more relevant
> > to them than religious consideration. The Muslim masses in Bengal had found
> > the demand for Pakistan to be a pragmatic way to rid themselves of the
> > bondage of socio-economic stagnation. For common Bengali Muslims, the
> > establishment of Pakistan would create limitless opportunities for their own
> > social mobility. *
> >
> > *Khalid Bin Syeed, one of the most distinguished scholars on Pakistan
> > Movement, succinctly refuted the myth about Jinnah's organizational
> > capabilities and perceptions of alleged mal-administration of congress: "It
> > was only after the Lahore Resolution was passed and the demand for a Muslim
> > state came to the forefront that Muslims in their thousands flocked to the
> > Muslim League. Thus, neither Jinnah's organizing ability nor the alleged
> > Congress misrule by themselves could have transformed the [Muslim] League
> > into a mighty force. The demand for Pakistan…., this stimulant which put
> > life and vigor into the Muslim League" Khalid Bin Syeed, Pakistan: The
> > Formative Years, London: Oxford University press, 1968, p. 179). *
> >
> > *The most relevant question that needs to be raised is this: who were the
> > chief messengers of Muslim League's demand for Pakistan in Bengal? The
> > messengers of Pakistan movement to Bengali middle classes and masses in
> > 1940s were A.K. Fazlul Huq, Shaheed Suhrawardy and Abul Hashim, the most
> > celebrated and trusted Bengali leaders of that era. Although they had
> > championed the cause of Pakistan movement, they were not willing to be
> > anti-Bangalee collaborationists or die-hard Jinnah loyalists. Doubtless,
> > they might have sincerely believed that the establishment of Pakistan would
> > emancipate the Bengali Muslims from the economic and social miseries. Yet,
> > they were not willing to compromise the interests of Bangalees. Jinnah had
> > used them to popularize his Two-Nation Theory and Demand for Pakistan. Yet,
> > he had neutralized or banished these doyens of Bengal politics at an
> > appropriate time so that no one from East Bengal (East Pakistan) could
> > effectively challenge his authoritarian mode of governance.*
> >
> > *Sher-e-Bangla A.K. Fazlul Hoque, the mover of 1940 Lahore Resolution for
> > Muslim homeland, was expelled from the All-India Muslim League in 1941. It
> > needs to be noted that Fazlul Huq, the most charismatic leader of Bengal,
> > with more popularity and name recognition throughout India than M.A. Jinnah
> > at least till mid-'30s, had joined the Muslim League in 1937 after forming
> > the Krishak Praja Party (KPP)- Muslim League coalition Government in Bengal.
> > He held leadership roles in both All-India Congress and All-India Muslim
> > League. Fazlul Huq was also involved in the formation of Muslim League in
> > 1906 (he was 33 years old in 1906! Nawab Salimullah had personally commended
> > his extraordinary brilliance and talent). He was the chief of Krishak Praja
> > Party, the party that won more Muslim seats in Bengal Provincial Legislature
> > in 1937 election than Muslim League. He was already a legendary figure in
> > Bengal politics before he formally joined the Muslim League in 1937. His
> > role as the Premier of Bengal was a catalyst in attracting the Muslim middle
> > class and peasantry to the Muslim League. His accomplishments as the
> > Premier of Bengal were beneficial and relevant to Bengali Muslim middle
> > class and peasantry. Doubtless, the rising tide of Muslim nationalism and
> > demand for Pakistan had gained an impetus with Sher-e- Bangla A.K. Fazlul
> > Huq's joing the Muslim League. *
> >
> > *Although his support for Pakistan Movement was genuine, Fazlul Huq did
> > not tolerate Jinnah's unfair interference in Bengal politics. Instead of
> > taking dictates from Jinnah or Liaquat Ali Khan, Fazlul Huq had resigned
> > from the Muslim League for which he had to be in political exile for more
> > than 10 years. Aimed at the collapse of Huq's Ministry in Bengal, Jinnah,
> > with his ruthless brilliance, personally saw to it that Muslim League
> > support is withdrawn from KPP-Muslim League coalition Government. The
> > collapse of KPP-ML coalition Ministry had devastating effect on the Bengali
> > Muslims. Fazlul Huq was forced to form a coalition Government with Shyma
> > Prashad Mukherji (known as Shayma-Huq Ministry). Yet, M.A. Jinnah could care
> > less. His sole goal was to send Fazlul Huq to political wilderness in an era
> > when the demand for Pakistan caught up the imagination of 33 million Bengali
> > Muslims. Jinnah was personally involved in spreading blatant falsehoods and
> > inaccuracies about Fazlul Huq throughout Bengal. He was called "traitor."
> > It is interesting to note that Fazlul Huq had been vilified by both
> > progressive faction (led by Shaheed Suhrawardy and Abul Hashim) and rightist
> > faction (led by Maulana Akram Khan and Nazimuddin) of Bengal Provincial
> > Muslim League! Aimed at demeaning and discrediting Fazlul Huq, the leaders
> > of Bengal Muslim League had addressed several hundred public meetings in
> > most of the districts in Bengal. Nothwithstanding his enormous popularity,
> > Sher-e-Bangla was not invincible. Muslim League's defamatory propaganda had
> > worked. Fazlul Huq's Ministry had collapsed in 1943. *
> >
> > *With Jinnah's blessing, Nazimuddim had formed the Ministry in Bengal in
> > 1943. For all practical purposes, Jinnah, indeed, had succeeded in
> > dismantling Sher-e-Bangla's stronghold in Bengal politics. (I have a plan to
> > elaborate on Jinnah's anti-Huq crusade in a separate article. Therefore,
> > suffice it at this time to point out that Fazlul Huq did not regain his
> > popularity among the Bangalee masses till he formed the United Front with
> > Maulana Bhasani and Suhrawardy during the historic election in 1954. He
> > felt elated and to some extent vindicated when he found out that the United
> > Front literally routed out the ruling Muslim League from East
> > Pakistan). *
> >
> > *It was Hussain Shaheed Suhrawardy who had emerged as the most dynamic
> > leader of Bengal Muslim League. His role as the General Secretary of BPML
> > till 1943 was crucial in the process of recruiting dedicated and capable
> > party workers. He was personally instrumental in the formation of Muslim
> > National Guards. He was the most energetic Minister in Fazlul Huq's cabinet
> > in charge of Labor Ministry. He personally cultivated support from
> > industrial workers in favor of Pakistan movement. He was also the most
> > active member in Nazimuddin Cabinet that was formed after the collapse of
> > Shayma-Huq cabinet in 1943. His popularity among the students had motivated
> > many from younger generation to be the most vocal supporters of Pakistan
> > movement. As the Chief Minister of Bengal in 1946, he shouldered the
> > responsibility of lending logistic support to Pakistan Movement. His role
> > during Direct Action Day in 1946 was pivotal towards hastening the
> > achievement of Pakistan (even though his action or inaction on that fateful
> > day in the history of Bengal had tarnished his image among Hindu
> > community). Suhrawardy had also moved the amendment to the original 1940
> > Lahore Resolution in the Delhi convention of Muslim League Legislators in
> > 1946 even though he himself was a staunch supporter of an independent United
> > Bengal. *
> >
> > *Abul Hashim, another progressive leader with tremendous organizational
> > skills, had succeeded Suhrawardy as the General Secretary of BPML in 1943.
> > Thousands of people had joined Muslim League in most of Bengal districts
> > during his tenure as the General Secretary of the party. With the help of
> > dedicated Muslim students, Hashim could bring Bangalee Muslims en masse
> > under the fold of the Muslim League. The numerical and organizational
> > strength of the party in Bengal was reflected in the landslide victory of
> > Muslim League candidates in 1945-'46 elections. Yet, Abul Hashim's wings of
> > power or influence in East Bengal political scene were clipped by Jinnah and
> > his sycophants both before and after Pakistan was achieved. *
> >
> > *Both Suhrawardy and Hashim tremendously contributed in the process of
> > transforming the Bengal Provincial Muslim League into a viable mass
> > organization that was capable of leading Pakistan Movement. Their dynamic
> > leadership had liberated BPML from the domination of the non-Bengali Nawabs
> > of Dacca and the upper-class leadership. For the first time, pro-Bengali,
> > progressive and middle class leaders dominated the leadership of Bengal
> > Muslim League. However, Muslim League in Bengal was divided into two
> > distinct factions: the progressive group was led by Suhrawardy and Hashim
> > whereas the rightwing conservative faction was affiliated to Khawaja
> > Nazimuddin and Maulana Akram Khan. *
> >
> > *The most relevant fact is that M. A. Jinnah had decided to nurture and
> > sponsor the conservative elements in the party. Aimed at packing the East
> > Pakistan Muslim League with Jinnah loyalists, it was the deliberate policy
> > of Jinnah to either ignore or malign the progressive members of the Bengal
> > Muslim League. For example, the followers of both Suhrawardy and Hashim
> > were taunted or humiliated by Jinnah loyalists and collaborationists even
> > before the establishment of Pakistan. Instead of recognizing Shaheed
> > Suhrawardhy's popularity, organizational skills and crucial contribution to
> > Pakistan movement at a critical juncture, the centralized All-India Muslim
> > League leadership had consciously lent its support to Khawaja Nazimuddin's
> > bid to become the leader of Muslim League legislators in Bengal on August 5,
> > 1947 (only 9 days before Pakistan was born!). With the selection of a
> > reactionary, conservative and discredited leader of BPML for assuming the
> > role of Chief Minister of East Bengal (East Pakistan) over a progressive and
> > dynamic leader of Suhrawardy's caliber and stature, M.A. Jinnah had in
> > effect sealed off the political fate of H.S. Suhrawardy and his followers in
> > East Bengal (East Pakistan). *
> >
> > *While Suhrawardy and Hashim were stalwarts in pre-partition Bengal Muslim
> > League, Maulana Bhasani was the legendary figure in Assam Muslim League. As the President of Assam Provincial Muslim League, he had spearheaded the
> > Pakistan movement in Assam. Maulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhasani was
> > discredited and maligned immediately after his return to East Bengal from
> > Assam. Nazimuddin-Akram Khan clique quickly forgot his crucial
> > contribution in favor of Pakistan during referendum in Sylhet. Maulana
> > Bhasani had won a seat in East Bengal Provincial Legislative Assembly (EBLA)
> > from South Tangail constituency. However, the Muslim League clique against
> > Maulana Bhasani with an aim to dislodge him from the Provincial Assembly
> > hatched a conspiracy out. His election to the Assembly was declared null and
> > void on flimsy ground. Above all, he was declared disqualified by the
> > provincial Governor to run for election for holding any public office! *
> >
> > *Once the establishment of Pakistan became a reality on August 14, 1947,
> > the Punjabi and other non-Bengali Muslim League leaders started
> > consolidating their positions in the Governments of both at the Center and
> > provinces. Choudhury Khaliquzzaman was elected as the Chief Organizer of the
> > Muslim League when Jinnah had assumed the office of Governor General of
> > Pakistan. Jinnah also became the President of the Constituent Assembly of
> > Pakistan. The self-appointed Governor General and President of the
> > Constituent Assembly had handpicked Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan to be the
> > Prime Minister of Pakistan. The actual decision-making authority of Pakistan
> > in the initial year after independence was centralized in the offices of the
> > Governor General and Prime Minister. Both Jinnah ana Liaquat Ali Khan
> > decided to employ Muslim League under the leadership of Choudhury
> > Khaliquzzaman as an instrument of subjugating and controlling the East
> > Bengal political scene. *
> >
> > *The ruling coterie of Pakistan had realized it quite early that the
> > die-hard loyalists needed to be promoted and installed in East Bengal Muslim
> > League establishment. Aimed at humiliating and demonizing the most popular
> > and celebrated Muslim League leaders of East Bengal (East Pakistan), the
> > ruling coterie of Pakistan adopted a deliberate policy of filling the East
> > Bengal (East Pakistan) Branch of Muslim League with the collaborationist,
> > reactionary and anti-Bangalee leaders. At the behest of both Jinnah and
> > Liaquat Ali Khan, Choudury Khaliquzzaman, the Chief of Organizer of the
> > All-Pakistan Muslim League, had literally leased the party in East Bengal to
> > Khawaja Nazimuddin and Maulana Akram Khan. They, in turn, sponsored those
> > Bengali leaders who were loyal to them. Neither Nazimuddin nor Akram Khan
> > had any mass support or charisma. Nor did they have any extraordinary
> > organizational capabilities. *
> >
> > *As the Chief Minister of East Bengal, Khwaja Nazimuddin also saw to it
> > that neither Suhrwardy nor his followers have any prominent role in East
> > Bengal politics. He lost no time to characterize Suhrawardy as the "Indian
> > agent" and an "enemy of Pakistan." Nazimuddin had misused his official
> > position for the purpose of relieving H.S. Suhrawardy from the membership of
> > the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. As if that was not enough of an insult
> > for the one of the most dynamic contributors to Pakistan Movement in Bengal!
> > It is a fact that the East Bengal Government of Khawaja Nazimuddin
> > prohibited Suhrawardy from entering or addressing public meetings in any
> > place of East Bengal. It was on July 13, 1948 when Liaquat Ali Khan,
> > Jinnah's handpicked Prime Minister of Pakistan, informed Suhrawardy that the
> > action of expulsion from East Bengal taken against him was a "matter
> > entirely for the Provincial Government and he (Liaquat Ali Khan) can't
> > interfere in their administration." *
> >
> > *One of the professed goals of Nazimuddin and Akram Khan coterie was to
> > keep the doors of the Muslim League closed to the most progressive and
> > dynamic members of Bengal Provincial Muslim League. The progressive forces
> > were systematically eliminated from positions of importance by the right
> > wing forces of the party. The followers of both Suhrawardy and Hashim were
> > specifically singled out to be excluded even from the primary membership of
> > the Muslim League. Both Maulana Bhasani and Suhrawardy protested this
> > exclusionary policy of the East Bengal Muslim League. A deputation of
> > dissatisfied East Bengal Muslim Leaguers under the leadership of Ataur
> > Rahman Khan had visited Choudhury Khaliquzzaman, the Chief Organizer of the
> > Pakistan Muslim League. The East Bengal delegates requested that Maulana
> > Akram Khan "be immediately directed to make the membership of the party
> > available to the dissident groups." However, neither representation nor
> > pressure from the dissidents did open the door of the Muslim League for
> > those whose views were at variance with the ruling coterie.*
> >
> > *The policy of exclusion had devastating effect on the efficacy of the
> > Muslim League in the changing political climate of East Bengal.
> > Notwithstanding the many limitations of Muslim League, over the years since
> > 1937 this party had become inclusive of the mainstream linguistic,
> > souci-economic and regional groups of people. Yet, the rightwing grip over
> > both the party and the Government of East Bengal seriously eroded the mass
> > support for Muslim League. The ruling Muslim League regime in East Bengal
> > had miserably failed to redress the genuine grievances of East Bengal. The
> > governmental policies and procedures of suppression and persecution of the
> > dissident groups in East Bengal had effectively alienated the mainstream
> > Banglee population of East Bengal. *
> >
> > *Both Jinnah and Liaquat totally ignored the fact that fifty six percent
> > of the total population of Pakistan were from East Bengal. The
> > discriminatory policy of the Central Government of Pakistan against East
> > Bengal started manifesting only after few months of independence. To the
> > chagrin of East Bengal, the Central Government of Pakistan had become the
> > exclusive domain of West Pakistanis. The representation of Bangalees in
> > various services including Military and Civil Service under the Central
> > Government was negligible. West Pakistanis deputed from the Central
> > Government had filled most of the crucial administrative positions including
> > the position of Chief Secretary in the Government of East Bengal. The
> > exports and imports were central subjects to be dominated by West
> > Pakistanis. The trade, commerce, banking, industries and other public or
> > private sector enterprises were totally controlled by West Pakistanis. The
> > allocation of annual expenditures for development of East Bengal was
> > negligible in comparison with West Pakistan even though East Bengal was
> > assessed for greater amount of revenues. Most of the foreign earnings were
> > generated from East Pakistan exports. Yet, foreign exchange allocation for
> > East Bengal government was almost nil. Since the Federal capital was located
> > in Karachi, the federal expenditures had no beneficial effects on the
> > economy of East Bengal. *
> >
> > *The Bengalis started resenting the discriminatory policies of the Central
> > Government. The progressive Bengali leaders (in some instances even
> > conservative Muslim Leaguers) had started protesting this kind of blatant
> > and unfair policies and programs of the ruling elite of Pakistan Government.
> > For example, one Bangalee member of Pakistan's Constituent Assembly pointed
> > out as early as February, 1948 that a "feeling is growing among the East
> > Pakistanis that Eastern Pakistan is being neglected and treated nearly as a
> > 'colony' of West Pakistan." It was obvious that the Central Government was
> > not willing to redress the genuine grievances of Bangalees. Instead of
> > redressing pressing problems of East Bengal, Pakistan's ruling elite kept on
> > sermonizing Bangalees to be more of Pakistanis. The typical anti-Bangalee
> > attitude of Jinnah and Liaquat Government was manifested in Prime Minister
> > Nawabzada Liaquat Ali Khan's arrogant response to a Bangalee leader's
> > question on Provincial autonomy for East Bengal (at the Constituent Assembly
> > of Pakistan on March 2, 1948): "Today in Pakistan there is no difference
> > between the Central Government and Provincial Government. The central
> > Government is composed of the provinces. …. We must kill this provincialism
> > for all times." *
> >
> > *The beginning of the end of Pakistan in East Bengal had started as early
> > as in 1948 when the Muslim League Government at both the Center and East
> > Bengal were pushing for Urdu to be the "only" State Language of Pakistan..
> > The language issue started mobilizing the people of East Bengal even before
> > the year 1947 was out. Neither Jinnah nor Liaquat Ali Khan was willing to
> > recognize that Urdu, an alien language to Bangalees, could never be imposed
> > on East Bengal. They never recognized the fact that the then Chief Minister
> > of East Bengal, Khawaza Nazimuddin, was aggravating and alienating the
> > Bangalee population when he started aggressive campaign in favor of Urdu to
> > be the State language of Pakistan. Jinnah's "Urdu, and Urdu alone shall be
> > the State Language of Pakistan" speeches in Dacca (on March 21, 1948 at
> > Race Course Maidan, and on March 24, 1948 at the Special Convocation
> > Ceremony of Dacca University) had been instantly criticized by the most
> > articulate segments of Bangalees. *
> >
> > *In a Radio Address to East Pakistanis before his departure from East
> > Pakistan on March 28, 1948, Jinnah had harshly rebuked the critics of his
> > language policy. He characterized the opponents of Urdu language as the
> > "opponents" of Pakistan. He said that the supporters of Bengali as a state
> > language are nothing but the "paid agents" of foreign countries. Aimed at
> > castigating those who had the guts to demand Bengali to be one of the State
> > languages of Pakistan, an imbecile Jinnah had labeled the champions of
> > Bengali language as "communists," "enemies of Pakistan," "breakers of
> > integrity of Pakistan," "defeated and frustrated hate-mongers," "champions
> > of provincialism," " breakers of peace and tranquility," "political
> > assassins and political opportunists," "traitors," " inhabitants of fools'
> > paradise," and "self-serving, fifth columnists" etc. He commended the Chief
> > Minister Khawaja Nazimuddin for using various forms of repressive and
> > aggressive measures against the supporters of Bengali language. Jinnah had
> > repeatedly reminded the proponents of Bangla language that the Central
> > Government of Pakistan "is determined to take appropriate stern actions"
> > against these evil forces. *
> >
> > *Jinnah's shameless advocacy for Urdu to be the only State language of
> > Pakistan clearly demonstrated his contempt for Bangalees and utter disregard
> > for democratic principle of majority rule. In fact, his outlandish
> > anti-Bengali language speeches in Dacca had sparked the first phase of
> > language movement in 1948. Following his footprints, Liaquat Ali Khan,
> > Nazimuddin and Nurul Amin made concerted efforts to impose Urdu as the only
> > State language of Pakistan. The historic 1952 Language Movement withstood
> > the naked and brute aggression against Bengali, the mother tongue of
> > Bangalees. Instead of being silenced or browbeaten by the renegades,
> > reactionary, rightist and collaborationist forces of Pakistan, Bangalees had
> > continued their fight for establishing Bengali as one of the State languages
> > of Pakistan.*
> >
> > *The ruling Muslim League coterie took it for granted that East Bengal
> > would forever remain subservient to the Central Government of Pakistan.
> > Although the Muslim League started loosing public support in East Bengal
> > even within the first year after independence, Jinnah's personal charisma
> > and his authoritarian style of leadership kept the party together.
> > Obviously, the Muslim League had remained relatively a viable political
> > party as long as Jinnah was alive. The ruling coterie also took it for
> > granted that public support will remain constant for the party that "fought
> > for and achieved Pakistan." The real crack in the popularity of the party
> > started manifesting after Jinnah's sudden death on September 11, 1948.
> > (Khawaja Nazimuddin's anti-Bangalee policies and programs had accrued
> > handsome dividends for him. The ruling coterie of Pakistan under Liaquat
> > Ali Khan's leadership had chosen him to succeed Jinnah as the Governor
> > General of Pakistan. Nurul Amin, another Jinnah loyalist, had succeeded
> > Khawaja Nazimuddin as the Chief Minister of East Bengal). *
> >
> > *It is obvious that the political development in East Bengal (East
> > Pakistan) was very much conditioned by the policies of both the Central and
> > provincial Governments. The main intent of the Central ruling elite was to
> > perpetuate their colonial policy in East Pakistan through the use of the
> > loyalist and collaborationist Muslim League Government. Both Nazimuddin and
> > Nurul Amin regimes in East Bengal had implemented various repressive and
> > discretionary measures. Instead of remaining subjugated by the ruling
> > elite of Pakistan, the dissident Muslim Leaguers (mainly from
> > Suhrawardy-Hashim faction of pre-independent Bengal Muslim League) had
> > joined hands with other progressive forces of East Bengal (East Pakistan) to
> > mobilize and organize themselves. Their sole objective was to oppose the
> > oppressive, repressive and discriminatory policies and programs of both the
> > Central Government of Pakistan and the Government of East Pakistan (East
> > Bengal). They also felt the acute need for a political party to ventilate
> > and articulate the genuine grievances of East Bengal. *
> >
> > *The emergence of East Pakistan Awami Muslim League (EPAML) on June 23,
> > 1949 as the first opposition party in East Bengal filled such a need. The
> > student community and intelligentsia of East Bengal were also the vanguards
> > in building resistance movements in the early years of Pakistan. The
> > students had provided the leadership of the language movements both in 1948
> > and 1952. The relentless struggle of Bangalees for freedom and
> > self-determination continued till they achieved complete independence
> > through a liberation war in 1971.*
> >
> > Back to Commentary <http://www.virtualbangladesh.com/commentary/>
> >
> > http://www.virtualbangladesh.com/commentary/jinnah.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>


------------------------------------

[* 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]
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chottala/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/chottala/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
chottala-digest@yahoogroups.com
chottala-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
chottala-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[chottala.com] EKTARA presents "Mohajoner Nao" on September 24, 2011 (Saturday) [1 Attachment]

[Attachment(s) from EKTARA included below]

Dear Community Members:
 
On behalf of EKTARA (a Washington D.C. based social, cultural and philanthropic organization), we would like to invite you to mark your calendar for the date-
 
Saturday, 24 September 2011
 
On this memorable day, EKTARA will bring on stage it's next production, "Mohajoner Nao" for the audiences in the U.S. This drama will be staged at a theater (to be announced soon) in the greater Washington D.C. area. "Mohajoner Nao" is a "gitol natok" based on the life story of the folk legend Shah Abdul Karim. This drama is written by renowned media personality and writer Shakoor Majid and currently is being staged in Bangladesh by the drama group "Subachan Nattya Shangsad". EKTARA is working diligently with the Bangladesh team to make this a historical night for the audiences in the U.S. This will be the first time such a unique and experimental drama based on the life story of Shah Abdul Karim will be staged on U.S. soil.
 
We are grateful to the Bangladeshi community in the greater Washington D.C. area for their unconditional support and encouragement and look forward to your continuous co-operation to make this upcoming event a success.
 
With best regards,
 
EKTARA Management

Attachment(s) from EKTARA

1 of 1 File(s)


__._,_.___


[* 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

__,_._,___