Agartala Conspiracy confession, what does it mean for our history

[SHAMK9]

Making a country like Pakistan(1947) was a mistake.

Speak for yourself and your country

 

[kalu_miah]

It does.

Many astute Bangladeshis had understood that they will need to find their own destiny separate from the Western wing. They had to make a start and if meant a covert start, so be it.

Most independence movements had to be covert by necessity.

Treason against the government of the day is not the same thing as treason against the country and its people. And if the (remote, unelected, dictatorial) government is one that looks down at the people, throwing it out is all the more justified.

Many leaders wanted independence, such as Bhashani, as I have found out and I respect him for that, specially for not getting India's help, before our Declaration of Independence. In fact, he was arrested and held incommunicado for the entire duration of the war by RAW after he crossed over to India in April 1971.

Agartala case was not an independence movement, it was a simple a case of treason by some unscrupulous desperadoes who conspired with RAW, the intelligence wing of an enemy country at the time.

Nonviolent mass agitation the likes of which AL and other political parties engaged in East Pakistan against military rule were perfectly justified. I have no issues with those. My only issues are with people who conspired with an enemy state and committed treason and are now trying to make them into heroes by falsely claiming that Sheikh Mujib was in their team.

 

[Vinod2070]

Many leader wanted independence, such as Bhashani, as I have found out and I respect him for that, specially for not getting India's help, before our Declaration of Independence. In fact, he was arrested and held incommunicado for the entire duration of the war by RAW after he crossed over to India in April 1971.

Agartala case was not an independence movement, it was a simple a case of treason by some unscrupulous desperadoes who conspired with RAW, the intelligence wing of an enemy country at the time.

Nonviolent mass agitation the likes of which AL and other political parties engaged in East Pakistan against military rule were perfectly justified. I have no issues with those. My only issues are with people who conspired with an enemy state and committed treason and are now trying to make them into heroes by falsely claiming that Sheikh Mujib was in their team.

Yes, for you India may be the enemy.

For some others, it was an ally against a far bigger enemy.

And they are heroes because of how the events transpired. It is always thus, isn't it?

 

[kalu_miah]

Yes, for you India may be the enemy.

For some others, it was an ally against a far bigger enemy.

And they are heroes because of how the events transpired. It is always thus, isn't it?

India became an official ally since our declaration of independence on March 26, 1971 and we have received help from India during the war. No one questions that. But it became an enemy state soon after the end of war, as it started meddling in internal affairs of a sovereign state.

 

[Vinod2070]

India became an official ally since our declaration of independence on March 26, 1971 and we have received help from India during the war. No one questions that.

The alliance would have started some time back. It was only sealed on this date.

But it became an enemy state soon after the end of war, as it started meddling in internal affairs of a sovereign state.

Again your perspective. We never look at Bangladesh as an enemy. We wish it well.

This "meddling" business is quite subjective and prone to wild exaggerations. Not sure how we can discuss it objectively.

 

[kalu_miah]

The alliance would have started some time back. It was only sealed on this date.

Again your perspective. We never look at Bangladesh as an enemy. We wish it well.

This "meddling" business is quite subjective and prone to wild exaggerations. Not sure how we can discuss it objectively.

You cannot start alliance with an enemy state govt. without committing treason. The cutoff date is the date of Declaration of Independence:
Declaration of independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Meddling is what your govt. does with its intelligence wing and hides its tracks using media propaganda. It is for you the Indian public to find out and uncover your govt. wrong doing and demand to put a stop to it, not cheer lead the govt. in its wrong doing and helping it to hide its tracks.

 

[Vinod2070]

You cannot start alliance with an enemy state govt. without committing treason. The cutoff date is the date of Declaration of Independence:
Declaration of independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

India was not an enemy of East Pakistan or later Bangladesh.

You would know that East Pakistan was not well defended. They said that "the defense of the East lay in the West". India didn't attack the East even in 1965.

Again, the leaders of Bangladesh decided to ally with India as that was the only way they could have secured the independence. They were successful and therefor the traitors are those who oppose them.

If they had failed, they would be the traitors. It has always been so.

Meddling is what your govt. does with its intelligence wing and hides its tracks using media propaganda. It is for you the Indian public to find out and uncover your govt. wrong doing and demand to put a stop to it, not cheer lead the govt. in its wrong doing and helping it to hide its tracks.

I will do it once you present a convincing proof and not wild eyed accusations with nothing to back them.

 

[kalu_miah]

India was not an enemy of East Pakistan or later Bangladesh.

You would know that East Pakistan was not well defended. They said that "the defense of the East lay in the West". India didn't attack the East even in 1965.

Again, the leaders of Bangladesh decided to ally with India as that was the only way they could have secured the independence. They were successful and therefor the traitors are those who oppose them.

If they had failed, they would be the traitors. It has always been so.

I will do it once you present a convincing proof and not wild eyed accusations with nothing to back them.

We had one country and two wings, not two different countries. So India could not be an enemy of West Pakistan and friend of East Pakistan.

Bangladesh started in 26th March 1971 and I have no problem with their getting help from India, as we had no other option. Some Jamati's or any other who did not agree and opposed Bangladeshi leaders can be called traitors, no question about it, but unless they committed war crimes, they did not commit any crime for holding such views.

If they had failed in getting independence, yes all these freedom fighters would be called traitors.

Follow this thread for evidence of Indian meddling:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...olvement-bangladesh-land-mass-1947-today.html

 

[animelive]

India was not an enemy of East Pakistan or later Bangladesh.

I will have to disagree, there was no East and West Pakistan, Pakistan was as a whole and India was our enemy. But yes, if we stayed with Pakistan, in the coming wars with India, we would have been annihilated and maybe even made into a vassal state because the military might was in the west wing(another sign of non-equality for which we broke off), so it was all for the good.

 

[Mattrixx]

Speak for yourself and your country

Im meaning my country not yours. The country which was made in 1947 was impractical.
With the thousand km distance between the two part. There were clear differences of
culture between two parts. After coming out of british ruler west pakistani leaders imposed
us another colonial rule. They didnt like us. They didnt agreed our empowerment. So
breaking of the country was inevitable. So rather than making this country they could
establish 2 different muslim countries. So where Im talking of ur country Im just taking
of our part of land which was one day shucked with u.
I think pk and bd have good relation and we have no hostility

You mean you'd prefer to live in India rather?

Without Jinnah's leadership, and without the All India Muslim League, Bangladesh would never have had existed in the first place.

Are u forgetting our great leader Fazlul haq. He proposed to have different countries with muslim majorities.
If Bangladesh was made in first place rather than all those political conflicts and war with the west our
future could be much more enriched. I think we just lost by going with pakistan. If we started our own
from the first day who knows we could have got a bigger land. With asham and some eastern part of india.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Are u forgetting our great leader Fazlul haq. He proposed to have different countries with muslim majorities.

And how did his proposal go? Did it receive enough support? Sources please.

If Bangladesh was made in first place rather than all those political conflicts and war with the west our
future could be much more enriched. I think we just lost by going with pakistan. If we started our own
from the first day who knows we could have got a bigger land. With asham and some eastern part of india.

And the Hindu-dominated Congress would hand over north east India to us for free?

Some Hindu folks back then were still mad at the fact that East Pakistan got a hold of Chittagong Hill Tracts, and not India.

And you are thinking that Bangladesh can already be established in 1947 under those conditions?

Like it or not, the creation of Pakistan will remain as a significant, and necessary part of Bangladesh's history and identity, just as the post-71' events did.

 

[Mattrixx]

And how did his proposal go? Did it receive enough support? Sources please.



And the Hindu-dominated Congress would hand over north east India to us for free?

Some Hindu folks back then were still mad at the fact that East Pakistan got a hold of Chittagong Hill Tracts, and not India.

And you are thinking that Bangladesh can already be established in 1947 under those conditions?

Like it or not, the creation of Pakistan will remain as a significant, and necessary part of Bangladesh's history and identity, just as the post-71' events did.

Learn some more of lahore resolution. After propsal of fazlull haq all member agreed to create only one muslim country.

On the basis of the above mentioned ideas of the Quaid, A. K. Fazl-ul-Haq, the then Chief Minister of Bengal, moved the historical resolution which has since come to be known as LahoreResolution or Pakistan Resolution.
The Resolution declared: "No constitutional plan would be workable or acceptable tothe Muslims unless geographical contiguous units are demarcated into regionswhich should be so constituted with such territorial readjustments as may benecessary. That the areas in which the Muslims are numerically in majority as in theNorth-Western and Eastern zones of India should be grouped to constitute independent states in which the constituent units shall be autonomous andsovereign".


The Resolution was passed on March 24. It laid down only the principles, with the details left to be worked out at a future date. It was made a part of the All India Muslim League's constitutionin 1941. It was on the basis of this resolution that in 1946 the Muslim League decided to go for one state for the Muslims, instead of two.
Having passed the Pakistan Resolution, the Muslims of India changed their ultimategoal. Instead of seeking alliance with the Hindu community, they set out on a pathwhose destination was a separate homeland for the Muslims of India.


Lahore Resolution 1940

 

[kalu_miah]

I will have to disagree, there was no East and West Pakistan, Pakistan was as a whole and India was our enemy. But yes, if we stayed with Pakistan, in the coming wars with India, we would have been annihilated and maybe even made into a vassal state because the military might was in the west wing(another sign of non-equality for which we broke off), so it was all for the good.

- the two wings of Pakistan were bound to seperate (Mounbatten gave it 25 years, Abul Kalam Azad also predicted it)
- Western Wing racially feels superior to most South Asians to their east and south, so just like Sikhs and Kashmiri's it is natural for them to seek a separate nation. The truly unique case is East Bengal Muslims who wanted a separate nation (race/ethnicity I believe is the hidden factor that is not mentioned but it plays a role as important as religion, people do not want to admit it though)
- it is because of this racial/ethnic factor that Western wing could never accept a majority rule by the Eastern wing
- once the two wings separated, the Western wing is continuing their long struggle to keep India at bay, with help of other powers to balance this threat (first it was the US, lately increasingly its China as China is slowly replacing US as no. 1 super power and India is getting closer to the US)
- we on the other hand became a vassal state, like Bhashani stated, after 1971, we are now half independent. We are trying to break free, but due to pro-India people among us, we are failing every time, because we are not being able to identify these pro-India people among us and to realize what damage they are doing to our sovereignty (note Pakistan never suffered this fate, because they never had a pro-India Gopalgonj clan like we do)
- if we want to really achieve sovereignty, and get out from under Indian boot, we need to make a bee line for other powers to bring a balance and make sure that pro-India politicians never again come to power in sovereign Bangladesh
Balance of power (international relations) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like Bhashani, I am also of opinion, that independence is good for us. But perhaps we could do it without the trauma and killings in 1971, which was initiated by some not so bright officers in Pakistan Army, despite warning and reservation by others. That would not destroy the 1000 year long close relationship we had with these two large Muslim blocs of population, Indian Muslims (non-Bengali) and Pakistan Muslims. When we were part of one empire or country, we could unite and act in unison. But partition had destroyed the unity by drawing borders and then 1971 trauma destroyed that unity and feeling of trust further. Knowing the long glorious history of Muslims in South Asia, that makes me feel sad. That feeling of trust and fellow feeling we had, prompted us to believe in 2 nation theory. Indira is partly correct when she said that in 1971 she buried 2 nation theory in Bay of Bengal. Mujib unknowingly created a tinderbox, but the tinderbox was ignited by some others:
Operation Searchlight - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Prior to the launch of the operation, a final meeting was held in GHQ.[clarification needed] Martial Law Administrator of East Pakistan and unified Commander of Pakistan's Eastern Military High Command Vice-Admiral Syed Mohammad Ahsan objected to the pre-planned operation.[14] Air Commodore Mitty Masud also objected to the operation, fearing that violence would provoke East-Pakistan into more violence. However, under pressure during the meeting from Pakistan's Army and Air Force's general, General Yahya Khan gave orders to his Army and Air Force commanders to launch the operation.[14] Disheartened and isolated, Admiral Ahsan resigned, in protest, from his position as Martial Law Administrator, unified commander of Eastern Military High Command, and the navy.[14] With operation came in effect, Air-Commodore Mitty Masud too resigned from the Air Force and as Commander of Eastern Air Force Command (EAFC).[14]

 

[Vinod2070]

We had one country and two wings, not two different countries. So India could not be an enemy of West Pakistan and friend of East Pakistan.

Bangladesh started in 26th March 1971 and I have no problem with their getting help from India, as we had no other option. Some Jamati's or any other who did not agree and opposed Bangladeshi leaders can be called traitors, no question about it, but unless they committed war crimes, they did not commit any crime for holding such views.

If they had failed in getting independence, yes all these freedom fighters would be called traitors.

Follow this thread for evidence of Indian meddling:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/bangla...olvement-bangladesh-land-mass-1947-today.html

I will have to disagree, there was no East and West Pakistan, Pakistan was as a whole and India was our enemy. But yes, if we stayed with Pakistan, in the coming wars with India, we would have been annihilated and maybe even made into a vassal state because the military might was in the west wing(another sign of non-equality for which we broke off), so it was all for the good.

Yes it was one country with two wings, but the two wings were not having the same importance for those who ran things in then Pakistan (dominated completely by West Pakistan).

For them, they were the mainland and BD was more or less like a small neglected colony, despite having the majority population. You must know that Western Pakistan left the East undefended as a bargaining chip, in exchange for Kashmir.

Of course, we had no interest in the bargain.

Will check the link. Thanks.

 

[kalu_miah]

Yes it was one country with two wings, but the two wings were not having the same importance for those who ran things in then Pakistan (dominated completely by West Pakistan).

For them, they were the mainland and BD was more or less like a small neglected colony, despite having the majority population. You must know that Western Pakistan left the East undefended as a bargaining chip, in exchange for Kashmir.

Of course, we had no interest in the bargain.

Will check the link. Thanks.

But back then, both wings of Pakistan were a sovereign country, what difference existed between two wings, that was for us to settle, and not for you to decide or meddle in. It was purely an internal matter.

Posters like you who cannot distinguish this simple fact, shows that when it comes to having way with your geo-political interest such as breaking another country that is a threat to your country, you do not respect sovereignty of a country. You did not do it then, nor do you do it now, as Indian govt. meddle in internal politics in Bangladesh, always taking side with AL, using all kinds of made up excuses like protecting Hindu minority and preventing Islamic extremism.