Disproving some genocide claims

[Vinod2070]

Are the sources not in the public domain? And if they are, the methodology should be available to critique and analyze. That is what this thread is for.

The situation in EP was different, that can be seen from how the insurgency in Baluchistan has been approached. Considering that I believe the evidence indicates the death toll to be closer to the 26,000 number, IMO the government troops did not go on any mass pogrom or massacre rampage.

Nonetheless, there was a breakdown in discipline, but again, once must consider the situation the troops found themselves in, cut off from West Pakistan, their supplies, and surrounded by a hostile external enemy and hostile groups within who also committed atrocities.

Nothing new for me to add to what I have already said.

I will just believe the number that is is commonly accepted by the neutral respected publications and it does not match the number that you give here.

I assume the real number would be somewhere near the Geometric mean or the Arithmetic or Harmonic mean of the numbers that you are giving and the number that Mujib gave.

May be a mean of all those means.

 

[Vinod2070]

The commitment to a plebiscite was before the IoA was signed and accepted, and per Owen Benet Jones, a part of the partition process in the case of any disputed accession.

Mountbatten in fact insisted that the plebiscite condition be included before he accepted the accession on behalf of India.

The accession cannot be legal until the plebiscite is carried out. The subsequent agreement to the UNSC resolutions also commits India to the principle of a referendum that allows the people of Kashmir to decide their destiny.

AM, we both know that both parties did not play totally fair at that time.

Pakistan tried to get Kashmir, Hyderabad and Junagarh besides some small Hindu Rajasthan kingdoms.

India too did the same. It was hardly based on any universal rules and themes of brotherhood and fair play, just some realpolitik.

Its hardly India's fault that we prevailed. Crying foul over split milk now is not very productive.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM, we both know that both parties did not play totally fair at that time.

Pakistan tried to get Kashmir, Hyderabad and Junagarh besides some small Hindu Rajasthan kingdoms.

India too did the same. It was hardly based on any universal rules and themes of brotherhood and fair play, just some realpolitik.

Its hardly India's fault that we prevailed. Crying foul over split milk now is not very productive.

No spilt milk at all - The rules of the partition applied, and they were violated in almost every instance in favor of India. India prevailed by illegal means in all of the princely states that may have been contested, that is the central point here - 'illegal occupation', which you disputed and which I have validated.

Now, as is usual, once having been shown how your argument is wrong, you are off on another tangent of 'everyone was doing XYZ'. Your point was that the IoA validated India's accession, I showed you why it did not.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Nothing new for me to add to what I have already said.

I will just believe the number that is is commonly accepted by the neutral respected publications and it does not match the number that you give here.

I assume the real number would be somewhere near the Geometric mean or the Arithmetic or Harmonic mean of the numbers that you are giving and the number that Mujib gave.

May be a mean of all those means.

But if Mujib was cmpletely wrong, as a few of the articles have stated, that '300,000' qwas incorrectly translated to '3 million' then the mean does not work, since the high end humbers are completely flawed.

Again, if the work on the high end numbers was empirical and based on sound methodology, it should not be hard to post that here.

 

[Vinod2070]

No spilt milk at all - The rules of the partition applied, and they were violated in almost every instance in favor of India. India prevailed by illegal means in all of the princely states that may have been contested, that is the central point here - 'illegal occupation', which you disputed and which I have validated.

Now, as is usual, once having been shown how your argument is wrong, you are off on another tangent of 'everyone was doing XYZ'. Your point was that the IoA validated India's accession, I showed you why it did not.

So please do explain why Pakistan tried to lay its hands on Hyderabad and Jungarh? Under which terms and rules of partition?

These states were overwhelmingly Hindu. Their populace never wanted to be a part of Pakistan.

If Pakistan was right in trying to get them, India was right in not letting Kashmir go too. It was as much legal or illegal as what you tried in the other instances.

I disagree with your "as is usual" and find it a bit presumptuous and arrogant.

I always said that I am not too familiar with the legality and just mentioned what little I know of it.

 

[Vinod2070]

But if Mujib was cmpletely wrong, as a few of the articles have stated, that '300,000' qwas incorrectly translated to '3 million' then the mean does not work, since the high end humbers are completely flawed.

Again, if the work on the high end numbers was empirical and based on sound methodology, it should not be hard to post that here.

If he was completely wrong and the numbers completely flawed, it should not be difficult for Pakistanis and Bangladeshis to correct that and get it accepted internationally and by the reputed publications.

That will resolve the issue once and for all.

 

[Vinod2070]

Copying another post from earlier, that supports the view that the numbers of the dead have been exaggerated - so note that it is not just RR arguing that now:

Vinod:

""The historian branch of the State Department held a two-day conference on June 28 and 29 on US policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972, inviting scholars from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to express their views on the declassified documents.

During the seminar, Bangladeshi scholars acknowledged that their official figure of more than 3 million killed during and after the military action was not authentic.

They said that the original figure was close to 300,000, which was wrongly translated from Bengali into English as three million.

Shamsher M. Chowdhury, the Bangladesh ambassador in Washington who was commissioned in the Pakistan Army in 1969 but had joined his country’s war of liberation in 1971, acknowledged that Bangladesh alone cannot correct this mistake. Instead, he suggested that Pakistan and Bangladesh form a joint commission to investigate the 1971 disaster and prepare a report.

Almost all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official figure put forward by Bangladesh and India.

Prof Sarmila Bose, an Indian academic, told the seminar that allegations of Pakistani army personnel raping Bengali women were grossly exaggerated.

Based on her extensive interviews with eyewitnesses, the study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.

Prof Bose noted that no neutral study of the conflict has been done and reports that are passed on as part of history are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing the other. The Bangladeshi narratives, for instance, focus on the rape issue and use that not only to demonize the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan.""
Sheikh Mujib wanted a confederation: US papers -DAWN - National; July 7, 2005

Note that while the link is a Pakistani newspaper, the original source of the information are declassified State Dept. documents.

Missed this post earlier.

Yes this is the kind of data that is much more trustworthy than RR's post.

I have seen this earlier too and it would be a good start if taken to the logical conclusion.

Wonder why that is not being done on an urgent basis by Pakistan and even Bangladesh.

Sarmila Bose' study, for whatever it was worth, was not a scientific and exhaustive study AFAIK. Some of her other opinions too were a bit controversial. So I am not sure how much credence to give her.

 

[Flintlock]

I don't believe anyone has said that the lower numbers of deaths are acceptable, that is just you constructing a strawman argument.

It is a similar exercise, unfortunately, to Vinod's attempts at stifling constructive discourse over what actually happened, and how all parties shared blame to a different extent, by resorting to comments like 'justifying/excusing atrocities'.

What is also being argued is that the PA was not deployed in EP with the specific intent of massacring and raping the local population, but rather the atrocities that were committed were a result of events and the situation spiraling out of control, in which the Indians played a huge hand.

Whatever the reasons are for the events spiralling out of control, there can be no justification for killing hundreds of thousands of people. Blaming India indirectly for the genocide is not only dishonest, its also illogical.

Also, killings on such a large scale can never be unintended. The Pakistani Army was specifically instructed to snuff out the movement by killing as many supporters of the movement as possible:

“…… we were told to kill the hindus and Kafirs (non-believer in God). One day in June, we cordoned a village and were ordered to kill the Kafirs in that area. We found all the village women reciting from the Holy Quran, and the men holding special congregational prayers seeking God’s mercy. But they were unlucky. Our commanding officer ordered us not to waste any time.”

Confession of a Pakistani Soldier


There is no doubt whatsoever about the targets of the genocide. They were: (1) The Bengali militarymen of the East Bengal Regiment, the East Pakistan Rifles, police and para-military Ansars and Mujahids. (2) The Hindus — “We are only killing the men; the women and children go free. We are soldiers not cowards to kill them …” I was to hear in Comilla [site of a major military base] [Comments R.J. Rummel: "One would think that murdering an unarmed man was a heroic act" (Death By Government, p. 323)] (3) The Awami Leaguers — all office bearers and volunteers down to the lowest link in the chain of command. (4) The students — college and university boys and some of the more militant girls. (5) Bengali intellectuals such as professors and teachers whenever damned by the army as “militant.” (Anthony Mascarenhas, The Rape of Bangla Desh [Delhi: Vikas Publications, 1972(?)], pp. 116-17.)



London, 6/13/71). The Sunday Times…..”The Government’s policy for East Bengal was spelled out to me in the Eastern Command headquarters at Dacca. It has three elements:

1. The Bengalis have proved themselves unreliable and must be ruled by West Pakistanis;
2. The Bengalis will have to be re-educated along proper Islamic lines. The - Islamization of the masses - this is the official jargon - is intended to eliminate secessionist tendencies and provide a strong religious bond with West Pakistan;
3. When the Hindus have been eliminated by death and fight, their property will be used as a golden carrot to win over the under privileged Muslim middle-class. This will provide the base for erecting administrative and political structures in the future.”



The genocide and gendercidal atrocities were also perpetrated by lower-ranking officers and ordinary soldiers. These “willing executioners” were fuelled by an abiding anti-Bengali racism, especially against the Hindu minority. “Bengalis were often compared with monkeys and chickens. Said Pakistan General Niazi, ‘It was a low lying land of low lying people.’ The Hindus among the Bengalis were as Jews to the Nazis: scum and vermin that [should] best be exterminated. As to the Moslem Bengalis, they were to live only on the sufferance of the soldiers: any infraction, any suspicion cast on them, any need for reprisal, could mean their death. And the soldiers were free to kill at will. The journalist Dan Coggin quoted one Punjabi captain as telling him, ‘We can kill anyone for anything. We are accountable to no one.’ This is the arrogance of Power.” (Rummel, Death By Government, p. 335.)


“For month after month in all the regions of East Pakistan the massacres went on,” writes Robert Payne. “They were not the small casual killings of young officers who wanted to demonstrate their efficiency, but organized massacres conducted by sophisticated staff officers, who knew exactly what they were doing. Muslim soldiers, sent out to kill Muslim peasants, went about their work mechanically and efficiently, until killing defenseless people became a habit like smoking cigarettes or drinking wine. … Not since Hitler invaded Russia had there been so vast a massacre.” (Payne, Massacre, p. 29.)

There is no doubt that the mass killing in Bangladesh was among the most carefully and centrally planned of modern genocides. A cabal of five Pakistani generals orchestrated the events: President Yahya Khan, General Tikka Khan, chief of staff General Pirzada, security chief General Umar Khan, and intelligence chief General Akbar Khan. The U.S. government, long supportive of military rule in Pakistan, supplied some $3.8 million in military equipment to the dictatorship after the onset of the genocide, “and after a government spokesman told Congress that all shipments to Yahya Khan’s regime had ceased.” (Payne, Massacre, p. 102.)

http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

 

[salman nedian]

Whatever the reasons are for the events spiralling out of control, there can be no justification for killing hundreds of thousands of people. Blaming India indirectly for the genocide is not only dishonest, its also illogical.

Also, killings on such a large scale can never be unintended. The Pakistani Army was specifically instructed to snuff out the movement by killing as many supporters of the movement as possible:

Do you think that we were mad to kill our own countrymen in huge numbers? One of the six points of Mujib was to deploy a militia in East Pakistan because there were not sufficient numbers of Pakistani troops in EP, this shows that we never intended to commit such act. Killings were the result of Indian involvement and support of Mukti Bahini who started killing people with the Indian support and only after that Pakistan army took sufficient measures to control the situation.

Killings are not justifiable so what is the justification for killings of Kashmiris by Indian army??????

 

[Flintlock]

Do you think that we were mad to kill our own countrymen in huge numbers?

No, infact it was a very sane decision (albeit criminal one) to kill as many people as possible who were likely to oppose Pakistani rule. It was taken at the topmost levels of the Pakistan Army and was carried out with full backing of the state.

One of the six points of Mujib was to deploy a militia in East Pakistan because there were not sufficient numbers of Pakistani troops in EP, this shows that we never intended to commit such act. Killings were the result of Indian involvement and support of Mukti Bahini who started killing people with the Indian support and only after that Pakistan army took sufficient measures to control the situation.

No, what shows the intent of Pakistan is my previous post. Kindly refute the allegations made there rather than ignoring them and responding with counter-allegations.

Killings are not justifiable so what is the justification for killings of Kashmiris by Indian army??????

That isn't up for discussion in this thread, so you can take it somewhere else.

 

[salman nedian]

No, infact it was a very sane decision (albeit criminal one) to kill as many people as possible who were likely to oppose Pakistani rule. It was taken at the topmost levels of the Pakistan Army and was carried out with full backing of the state.

A country has full right to take measures to protect its integrity and Indian involvement in EP is not an allegation in fact it is the part of history which cannot be denied. When Indians can take action in Punjab at golden Temple and Kashmir than we also have the right to protect our country from foreign trained people and it’s fair enough.

 

[Flintlock]

A country has full right to take measures to protect its integrity and Indian involvement in EP is not an allegation in fact it is the part of history which cannot be denied. When Indians can take action in Punjab at golden Temple and Kashmir than we also have the right to protect our country from foreign trained people and it’s fair enough.

Sure, except that in this case the massacred people were not combatants, but ordinary civilians.

Not only that, the West Pakistanis were racist against Bengalis, and considered them as inferior. The same attitude is seen towards the "kafir" hindus as well.

This wasn't just about protecting the integrity of the nation, it was about the arrogance of the Pakistanis who considered Bengalis as slaves fit to be lorded over.

 

[salman nedian]

Sure, except that in this case the massacred people were not combatants, but ordinary civilians.

Not only that, the West Pakistanis were racist against Bengalis, and considered them as inferior. The same attitude is seen towards the "kafir" hindus as well.

This wasn't just about protecting the integrity of the nation, it was about the arrogance of the Pakistanis who considered Bengalis as slaves fit to be lorded over.

Bengalis are our brothers; even today we share the same history so specific acts cannot be generalized. South and North Indians too have problems of racism among themselves.

You cannot deny the criminal acts of Mukti Bahinis( I m not talking about all Bengalis and most of them were loyal to Pakistan) and to control them Pakistan Army took action although some atrocities by army cannot be ruled out but the case was not as u are presenting.

India too killed civilians in Punjab and Kashmir.

 

[Flintlock]

Bengalis are our brothers; even today we share the same history so specific acts cannot be generalized. South and North Indians too have problems of racism among themselves.

This is not some specific act, its one of the biggest genocides of the 20th century.

Its even in the Guinness book of World Records.

You cannot deny the criminal acts of Mukti Bahinis( I m not talking about all Bengalis and most of them were loyal to Pakistan) and to control them Pakistan Army took action although some atrocities by army cannot be ruled out but the case was not as u are presenting.

I am not going to comment on the Mukti Bahini here.

Dude, this was highly organized genocide. It has been recognized as such by all the experts in the field.

India too killed civilians in Punjab and Kashmir.

Again off-topic, but nothing has ever happened in India which can come even close to East Pakistan in terms of scale.

 

[salman nedian]

This is not some specific act, its one of the biggest genocides of the 20th century.

Its even in the Guinness book of World Records..

I think it’s a matter of Pakistan and Bangladesh and none of us can claim that the numbers of killed men is correct so we cannot make assumptions.

Dude, this was highly organized genocide. It has been recognized as such by all the experts in the field.

Yes! Indians recognize this and they are experts in this field.