bangladesh getting su-30mkk around 2016? wiki

[Nilgiri]

and the flawed demand from Bengali politicians.

How was the demand "flawed"?

Bengalis were supposed to always know and keep to their 2nd class status and their votes shouldn't count?

 

[Saiful Islam]

How was the demand "flawed"?

Bengalis were supposed to always know and keep to their 2nd class status and their votes shouldn't count?

Declaring Bengali as state language in Uniedt Pak was absurd, none of ethnic groups understood Bengali (Urdu as it was mutually intelligible). Did Pashtuns demand Pashto as national language, no. Shiekh Mujib had his highs and lows of Bengali-ness and that moment was the former.

But I didn't say that Bangladesh should own up to it all. A big part of it was the institutional racism like army.

 

[Nilgiri]

Declaring Bengali as state language in Uniedt Pak was absurd, none of ethnic groups understood Bengali (Urdu as it was mutually intelligible). Did Pashtuns demand Pashto as national language, no. Shiekh Mujib had his highs and lows of Bengali-ness and that moment was the former.

Bengalis were more than 50% of population of United Pakistan. Having Bengali as one of the recognised official languages is definitely a reasonable request is it not? Urdu for West Pakistan, Bengali for East Pakistan....and English for combined (at elite level). Those that needed to be bilingual could be where relevant....system could have easily worked and country could have stayed united with some fairly common sense compromises.

And just how much mutual intelligibility is there between pure Urdu and pure Punjabi, Pashto, Sindhi etc? Exposure to it is still required. Plus Pashto, Sindhi and the other languages of Pakistan did not form 50%+ of its speakers like Bengali did. In fact Bengali was the most prevalent mother tongue in the United Pakistan....since very few in West Pakistan at the time had Urdu as the mother tongue.

In almost any other country, Bengali would have easily been a national official language when you look at the simple demographics.

Definitely not a flawed demand in my opinion at all. Idea of Pakistan was first brought up in the center of Bengal anyways right? Why should Urdu alone take credit for it?

 

[Saiful Islam]

Bengalis were more than 50% of population of United Pakistan. Having Bengali as one of the recognised official languages is definitely a reasonable request is it not? Urdu for West Pakistan, Bengali for East Pakistan....and English for combined (at elite level). Those that needed to be bilingual could be where relevant....system could have easily worked and country could have stayed united with some fairly common sense compromises.

And just how much mutual intelligibility is there between pure Urdu and pure Punjabi, Pashto, Sindhi etc? Exposure to it is still required. Plus Pashto, Sindhi and the other languages of Pakistan did not form 50%+ of its speakers like Bengali did. In fact Bengali was the most prevalent mother tongue in the United Pakistan....since very few in West Pakistan at the time had Urdu as the mother tongue.

In almost any other country, Bengali would have easily been a national official language when you look at the simple demographics.

Definitely not a flawed demand in my opinion at all. Idea of Pakistan was first brought up in the center of Bengal anyways right? Why should Urdu alone take credit for it?

But they didn't though did they. Their demand was not Bengali for East Pak but United Pakistan. East Pak wasn't a federation. Dude, the Afghans/Pashtuns speak Urdu, Mohajirs (Indian Muslims from UP, Bihar, Gujarat) they all spoke Urdu, Urdu isn't a language bound by territory as it was also a flourishing language in Bengal too especially with educated Bengali Muslims (for example Ubaidullah Ubaidi, relative of Khwaja Nazimuddin). But Bengali to be specific is an East Indian language which wouldn't work irrespective of Bengalis being the largest.

It was fair to put a non provincial language as the national language as many ethnic groups contributed to Urdu literature. An aristocratic language used in Mughal courts so subsequently Pakistan felt it needed to use something which everyone was speaking. Punjabis didn't demand their own language, pashtos didn't.

 

[Nilgiri]

But they didn't though did they. Their demand was not Bengali for East Pak but United Pakistan.

Yah however it is implemented in theory is fine as long as its there. Can implement as one language for each wing...if that is unacceptable...have both languages for both wings and let people decide which one they want to use. If Awami league wanted the latter is it wrong? They did not want Bengali to be the ONLY official language of Pakistan did they? Just equal status with Urdu....is it so wrong to ask this for a majority population?

ude, the Afghans/Pashtuns speak Urdu, Mohajirs (Indian Muslims from UP, Bihar, Gujarat) they all spoke Urdu, Urdu isn't a language bound by territory as it was also a flourishing language in Bengal too especially with educated Bengali Muslims (for example Ubaidullah Ubaidi, relative of Khwaja Nazimuddin).

Mohajirs were the ones instrumental in pushing to make Urdu THE official language because they are the only ones that can really claim it as mother tongue in Pakistan (originally) and they also had suffered much during partition and the most violent aspect of the need for Pakistan (as they perceived it) was fresh in their hearts and minds.

This is all fine and understandable but why deny the right to have Bengali as an equal official language too? Where is it written that a country can have only one official language? You are not forcing everyone in West Pakistan to suddenly learn and only use Bengali.....you are just asking that Bengalis langauge is also recognized in line with its large prevalent majority usage in a united country.

But Bengali to be specific is an East Indian language which wouldn't work irrespective of Bengalis being the largest.

Unilaterally enforcing Urdu on the entire Bengal is just as wrong as enforcing Bengali on West Pakistan. If saner minds had prevailed, both would be co-official languages. Is that so threatening to concept of Pakistan?

In Canada we have both English and French as official languages. No one is forcing People in english speaking communities to learn French and no one is forcing vice versa either. But those that are willing and able ...learn both for an added brotherhood and advantage.

Same situation is there in Finland with Finnish and Swedish. Only govt services must be required to provide in either language, otherwise citizens are free to choose either one (normally depends on which community you are born in) and learning the other one is normally done in School for added benefit (learning another language and being bilingual is quite a good thing for people in general intellectually).

Something similar could have definitely been done in pre-71 Pakistan....and along with less racist, elitist views of West Pakistan military/politicians...would have created next to no space for East Bengal separatists to form, solidify, expand and eventually succeed.

It is their problem they looked down on Bengali as a "Hindu" "inferior" language....and we all know how they expanded this view to look down on Bengalis as a whole....which lead to 1971 slowly but surely.

It was fair to put a non provincial language as the national language as many ethnic groups contributed to Urdu literature. An aristocratic language used in Mughal courts so subsequently Pakistan felt it needed to use something which everyone was speaking. Punjabis didn't demand their own language, pashtos didn't.

It is fine if they didn't demand it....but Bengalis did right? What is wrong in accepting the demand for a stronger, linguistically inclusive federation?

Or are you saying common Bengali did not want Bengali as a national language? Was not bengali language movement in 1952 early enough to gauge the popularity of this demand?

 

[Homo Sapiens]

First, did they give you that Autonomous entity?

Second, autonomous entities are autonomous in a very limited sense, Pakistan's war would have been your war, their 'strategic assets' aka terrorists would have been yours too, and their no-trade policy with India would have been your policy too, not very bright situation for you. Even today they would have been too proud to listen to you.

You are assuming that war,terrorist would have only path Pakistan could undertook,there were no alternative?Pakistan is in current mess due to wrong policy of general in last three decades,and it was avoidable if democratic prudent leadership held that country.If in 1970 political leadership were pragmatic and compromising to a federal structure than later trajectory of Pakistan would have been completely different.Main problem with Bengali that time was, Pakistan was governed as a unitary state and military held the power.If a democratic solution formulated out in talk after march 1971 conference with Sheikh Mujib than dismemberment could have been prevented.Up to the last moment Bengali wanted autonomy not outright independence.If the situation were that hopeless as you stating than I think independence movement would have started much earlier.

Regarding their war becoming our war,Yes we would have participated that war as a fellow countrymen if it were unavoidable.When there is a war in kashmir or FATA do you think Sindhi people think 'that is the war for Punjabi and Pashtun not ours?'But that don't happen and Sindhi participate that distant war as a fellow countrymen,the same would have been true for Bengali.Remember Bengali participated in 1965 war with enthusiasm and patriotic zeal.

Why not? Pakistan turned radical because of Zia Ul Haq's policy, that's the natural progression of countries created on the basis of religion, Bangladesh would have gone the same way.

The recent Bengali nationalism and Rabindrik culture that you are seeing in Bangladesh was promoted as a bulwark by one political power against another political power backed by the Islamic radicals and Pakistani loyalists in Bangladesh.

Zia-ul-Haque could have been avoided if a political solution were reached in 1971.So no latter known trajectory for Pakistan.Rabindric culture is not necessary for crating a democratic pluralistic country.Rabindranath himself was communal in mentality and he ignored the majority muslims of Bengal.So he is not much help for Bangladesh.

Some say the rising sentiment for the break up was a creation of a third country sitting in between, but that must not be true. However, the break up was waiting to happen from the very first day of its forming, it had to happen in one way or another by now. How am I so certain? Oh well, it already happened.

No,breakup was not entirely unavoidable.There were no talk of breakup untill last moment.Most people was against breakup,it only happened because political leader of that time could not reach a compromise and resorted to force.With pragmatism and prudence on part of the politician the breakup could have been avoided.It only seems unavoidable because it already happened.but in 1971 this was not in the mind of majority population.

 

[TopCat]

Declaring Bengali as state language in Uniedt Pak was absurd, none of ethnic groups understood Bengali (Urdu as it was mutually intelligible). Did Pashtuns demand Pashto as national language, no. Shiekh Mujib had his highs and lows of Bengali-ness and that moment was the former.

But I didn't say that Bangladesh should own up to it all. A big part of it was the institutional racism like army.

Bengali was asked to be as one of the Officail languages not the sole official language, the same status as in British India. English/Urdu/Bengali/Hindi/Telegu was official language of British India, so it could be Urdu and Bengali in Pakistan. Besides, Mujib had near zero role in language movement, including most politicians.
Urdu was not taken off from the official status after Bengali was allowed to be used as official.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

To begin with, you are free to reunite with Pakistan, I am not trying to discourage you from doing that.

I don't want to join Pakistan.I am happy with independent Bangladesh.My only point is 1971 was avoidable and both India and Bangladesh benefited from 1971,so no one is eternally indebted to the other.

By the way,forget about reunion with Pakistan.We can maintain very cordial relation with Pakistan and closely co-operate with Pakistan related to defence and security specially nuclear technology. Have India any objection?

 

[dray]

You are assuming that war,terrorist would have only path Pakistan could undertook,there were no alternative?Pakistan is in current mess due to wrong policy of general in last three decades,and it was avoidable if democratic prudent leadership held that country.If in 1970 political leadership were pragmatic and compromising to a federal structure than later trajectory of Pakistan would have been completely different.Main problem with Bengali that time was, Pakistan was governed as a unitary state and military held the power.If a democratic solution formulated out in talk after march 1971 conference with Sheikh Mujib than dismemberment could have been prevented.Up to the last moment Bengali wanted autonomy not outright independence.If the situation were that hopeless as you stating than I think independence movement would have started much earlier.

Regarding their war becoming our war,Yes we would have participated that war as a fellow countrymen if it were unavoidable.When there is a war in kashmir or FATA do you think Sindhi people think 'that is the war for Punjabi and Pashtun not ours?'But that don't happen and Sindhi participate that distant war as a fellow countrymen,the same would have been true for Bengali.Remember Bengali participated in 1965 war with enthusiasm and patriotic zeal.

Zia-ul-Haque could have been avoided if a political solution were reached in 1971.So no latter known trajectory for Pakistan.Rabindric culture is not necessary for crating a democratic pluralistic country.Rabindranath himself was communal in mentality and he ignored the majority muslims of Bengal.So he is not much help for Bangladesh.

No,breakup was not entirely unavoidable.There were no talk of breakup untill last moment.Most people was against breakup,it only happened because political leader of that time could not reach a compromise and resorted to force.With pragmatism and prudence on part of the politician the breakup could have been avoided.It only seems unavoidable because it already happened.but in 1971 this was not in the mind of majority population.

If you are going to include so many 'ifs' & 'buts' in your argument, then it can also be argued that the whole world could have been one single borderless entity without any division between people. Unfortunately the history of the world seldom took the ideal path. Every individual and every country is where they are today because of the decision they took, and it cannot be changed now. Pakistani Punjabis behaved in a certain way and took certain decisions because that is the way they were, and Bengalis of east Pakistan couldn't change that. The path west Pakistan and today's Pakistan took was not the only path, but that was the path they were capable of taking, their thought process, their mentality have driven them in that path, and the same mentality would have prevented them to be controlled or directed by the thought process of the Bengalis of east Pakistan. So, if east and west Pakistan were together today, then east Pakistan would have continued to remain as the inferior of the two with significant dissatisfaction and probable rebelion among the east Pakistani population. And yes, east Pakistan would have been a far more conservative and radicalized Islamic state similar to the west Pakistan, with Jamatis and razakars taking the centerstage of east Pakistani center of power and society. In fact, your thought process would have been different today, probably supporting the path Pakistan took post 1971. History has taken a certain course because it was supposed to be like that only.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

If you are going to include so many 'ifs' & 'buts' in your argument, then it can also be argued that the whole world could have been one single borderless entity without any division between people. Unfortunately the history of the world seldom took the ideal path. Every individual and every country is where they are today because of the decision they took, and it cannot be changed now. Pakistani Punjabis behaved in a certain way and took certain decisions because that is the way they were, and Bengalis of east Pakistan couldn't change that. The path west Pakistan and today's Pakistan took was not the only path, but that was the path they were capable of taking, their thought process, their mentality have driven them in that path, and the same mentality would have prevented them to be controlled or directed by the thought process of the Bengalis of east Pakistan. So, if east and west Pakistan were together today, then east Pakistan would have continued to remain as the inferior of the two with significant dissatisfaction and probable rebelion among the east Pakistani population. And yes, east Pakistan would have been a far more conservative and radicalized Islamic state similar to the west Pakistan, with Jamatis and razakars taking the centerstage of east Pakistani center of power and society. In fact, your thought process would have been different today, probably supporting the path Pakistan took post 1971. History has taken a certain course because it was supposed to be like that only.

OK man,I will not lengthen this discussion anymore.But would you agree with me that both India and Bangladesh benefited from 1971?

 

[dray]

I don't want to join Pakistan.I am happy with independent Bangladesh.My only point is 1971 was avoidable and both India and Bangladesh benefited from 1971,so no one is eternally indebted to the other.

By the way,forget about reunion with Pakistan.We can maintain very cordial relation with Pakistan and closely co-operate with Pakistan related to defence and security specially nuclear technology. Have India any objection?

The alternative option of 'being indebted' is not 'being ungrateful'!!

You can respectfully recognize India's contribution without being indebted if you are proud to have your own sovereign state, or you can curse India in case you are mourning the creation of Bangladesh as a sovereign state....!

Btw, you are welcome to deal with the western lobby with your Pak-BD nuclear cooperation.

 

[BDforever]

The alternative option of 'being indebted' is not 'being ungrateful'!!

You can respectfully recognize India's contribution without being indebted if you are proud to have your own sovereign state, or you can curse India in case you are mourning the creation of Bangladesh as a sovereign state....!

Btw, you are welcome to deal with the western lobby with your Pak-BD nuclear cooperation.

as if India did not have own interest

 

[dray]

OK man,I will not lengthen this discussion anymore.But would you agree with me that both India and Bangladesh benefited from 1971?

Your parents also get benefited in many ways if you grow up as a good and successful person, that doesn't mean you should not recognize their contribution and see it as a selfish act.

@BDforever this is for you too.

 

[Max Pain]

Im surprised to see quite a lot of Bangladeshis still having a Soft Corner for Pakistan,
if only People of West Pakistan were a little sane and the drunk racist General Yahya didnt rule that land, things would have been different.

 

[damiendehorn]

Im surprised to see quite a lot of Bangladeshis still having a Soft Corner for Pakistan,
if only People of West Pakistan were a little sane and the drunk racist General Yahya didnt rule that land, things would have been different.

It wasn't just one drunk racist general, it was the whole west pakistan. Sorry but we are fine being independent, hope your country all the best but not all of us have a soft spot for pakistan even though we dislike india.