Fall of Dhaka: Memories of a bloody December

[Indika]

Indian bloodshed on Golden temple is justified, but the operation by Pakistan forces was not! what a bullshit!

yeah if you think lal masjid operation is justified so is golden temple. both the holy places lost sanctity once it was occupied by armed ppl.

 

[kalu_miah]

@ Well @kalu_miah, you have asked lot of queries, definitely I will answer your question. But you know it varies from man to man. I have served in many areas, many regions and many countries and still serving. I was born in Pakistan (Rawalpindi), I was brought up in Pakistan later in December 1970 I came back to East Pakistan as I was studying in a residential school & College. However, during my vacation I used to go to Pakistan to meet my parents. I can only say something little bit after 1963. In 1963, I was in Karachi in Malir Cantt as my father used to serve there in army. About Karachi I can hardly say about the people. I was not that matured at that time. I remember in 1962, I saw for the first time a TV in a fare. I saw some Pakistani soldiers moving to Congo for UN Mission. Some Bengalise came to my father for "Suparish" later they used to bring lot of gifts for our family. In 1964, we came back to East Pakistan and stayed about a year before 1965 war. During this period I witnessed Ayub's Presidential Election. Once, I remember Ayub Khan visited our Sub-Divisional Town, I found not a single male in our village. All went to see him. He was really popular in East Pakistan. I found every where his BD (Basic Democracy) member. Every one was eager to listen about West Pakistan. Most of the young people were enrolled in Ansar & Mujahid Forces and it was really a formidable force well motivated on "Larke Lenge Pakistan ". In early 1965 , we went to Nowshera (Peshawer). Here, I come across with local people specially " Pukhtun". Pukhtun people were very simple, no idea about Bangal. When ever we used to buy fish, they used to give all fish heads free. Well, once I was admitted to the school, they used to call me, " Bangali babu iaya, morgi chura ke laiya murgi ne mara puncha, Bangali babu bangia ganja". Then they used to tell us by seeing us, " bu i, machli ki bu iyi ". Then we used to say that " aap lok tu hati ke kan kha te wo ". Once I and my brother went to a mosque to learn Arabic to recite, initially they could not recognized us as Bengali but once the students came to know that we were Bengal, so it became their headache and finally one day the Moulvi Sab called us and said not to come any more. In the school, I found there was one mistress who used to like me and their was another mistress who used to dislike for no reason. She even one day complained to my father that " Aap ka larka, class me buhat sharat karta hai magar batoy me bohat tej hai" and I had it from my father till I reached our house. Later on. I come to know the one who used to like me was a Hindustani and the one who used to dislike me was a Punjabi.

@ However, I enjoyed our stay there. During that period the war (65) broke out, saw lot of Indian aircraft than almost daily even during night. Learned little bit "Pushtu", like, "Rasha kana, dil ta rasa, rotai okhra ".We hardly had any interaction with the locals, we always used to fix with the Bengalise. I never saw any West Pakistani invited us in their home for food, they used to invite us in any"milad". One think, I marked in the school that we Bengalise were little bit sharper than them. I used to study in a English Medium School. Our English pronunciation were better. By the way, I learned Urdu privately just within 03 months and merge with them with no difficulty. Soon, I became 2nd in the class.The condition of other school were very very poor. During winter season, due to too much cold students of these schools used to carry a coal "chula" and in one hand to carry a "tekhti". "Tekhti" is a sharp 2/1 feet wooden rectangular plate having plain handle at the top.The plain side of the :Tekhti" was painted with white mud. This was used widely for writing urdu. We never carried in English medium schools. Living standard of the people in villages were very poor. Their houses I saw any were made of mud with stone. They never used tin on the roof top.They used to sleep in a single "charpoy". In the town, I hardly saw any Taxi . I saw every where Tunga and bus in those days.

@ From Nowshera, we were posted to Rawalpindi. By the way, whether it is Peshwar, or Nowshera or Rawalpindi all were military areas and the whole city developed on military personnel. Even Murree was also made by the British period and it was restricted for the local people. These areas were full of Churches which are still in existence. I was in Rawalpindi till December 1970 then came back. In Rawalpindi, there were lot of Bengalise and we had a good inter act with them. There was one Bengali school in Chaklala. There were many Bengalise in Islambad also. I saw many Nowakhaila in Islamabad selling “Malta”. By the way on the eve of election cent person of us voted for Awami Leaque with the hope that this time Bengalise will rule Pakistan.

Comment

In West Pakistan .

@ We, the Bengalise were not discriminated in West Pakistan rather they had always a soft corner for us. But the percentage of Bengalise in the Federal Govt was too less. But again, it was not that too less the way Awami propagates. Bengalises were dominating in Foreign Services as they used to do better in written exams. But the problem was some where else. In 1947, the number of Bengalise in Defence and Civil services were completely missing. It increased in the subsequent year but it does not came at par. There were 30 % vacancies at Centre in all sectors but hardly any Bengalise went to West Pakistan for job less those had relatives. During our times (1962-70) whoever came got the job. So far what I saw who ever was educated had got reasonable good job. You can’t expect all jobs seating at Dacca.

@ About jobs in Defence, well Pakistanis also considered Bengalise as non-Marshal race so they discriminate the Bengalise from the initial days. During the Muslim Leaque times (upto 1958), Bengalise were recruited in Defence Forces but slowed down during Ayub’s period. It increased once Yahya became Chief of Staff and doubled once he came to power. Punjabi’s were not that bad the way it is being depicted now in Bangladesh. Punjabi’s were too loyal to British once Punjab came under British in 1846 after the Anglo Sikh War. That is why Punjabi’s were dominating in British Indian Defence Forces as well as Civil Services. So, the system and tradition continued.

@ Regarding one point of “Shia” you asked for my comment. Well, British always followed, “Divide and Rule “Policy”. After the 1st World War, once the “Khifat Movement” started in British India, British quickly took the confidence of “Shia” and “Ahmedia” Muslims. They started sponsoring the Shia Business Men. Soon Shia Muslims of Indian Sub-Continent came to lime light. They were quickly enrolled in all sectors. Even more than Hindus. Similar thing happened in Syria. Syria was a mandatory state under France. (League of Nation) Once Syria got her independence from France they some how managed to hand over to a Shi group of only 12 %.

In East Pakistan .

@ Once East Bengal came under Pakistan in 1947, there was nothing other than Jute and Paddy field. There was not a single Bengali Industrialist. All were low and middle label employee’s. Even in Calcutta Steamer Services Hindus and Beharees were dominating. Even the “chai wala” in steamer were Hindu in East Bengal. All school and College teachers were Hindus. The percentage of Bengalee teachers were very rare. In a tripical British Thana area, the post master was Hindu, Railway Station Master was Hindu, Head Master was Hindu, College Principal was Hindu, Dharga Babu was Hindu and what not.

@ Once India got separated all Hindus went to India and there was lot of vacuum. Many Baharee railway Employees came from Assam & Bihar and were quickly put in. Special interviews were taken to recruit Pakistan time Civil Services but all DC’s, SDO’s and SP’s came from West Pakistan. All Indian Muslim Capitalist quickly came to East Bengal and invest their money. Now, the problem arose. These Panjabi’s / Beharees / Hindustani’s once seat on the chair and blindly started employing the local Biharee refugees instead of Bengalise. At that time near about 23/25 lac of Beharee refugees came from India. So, the rift between Bengalise and Biharees started. Soon, within 5 to 10 years all big shops at Nawabpur in Dacca and at Jublee Road in Chittagong belonged to either Biharee or non-Bengali. Non- Bengali businessmen were very expart in business. Many came from Rangoon, many came from Gujrat and other places of India.

@ Soon, riot took place between Bengali and Biharees at Adamjee. Near about thousand killed, mostly Biharees. Soon all non-Bengali big shots took shelter in Dacca Cantt and soon Pakistan Govt sold land to then in and around Cantt area. That was the reason why so many civilians are still their in Dacca Cantt. Soon , The non-Bengalise became the owner of big shops of Dacca and Bengalise became the Rickshah pullers and “Fal wallas” in Gulistan and New Market. All industries at Tejgaon, Tongi and Narranganj belongs to 22 families of Pakistan. Who all were the main workers of these industries, certainly, the Biharees. Who were the guards, the Pathans ! Who all were the Directors- Non-Bengalise. Who all were DC’s & SP’s, definitely non-Bangali. Who was the GOC of Cantonment, Panjabis.

Excellent account of the 24 years between 1947-1971, in regards to my questions. It looks like at 1947 different ethnic groups in Pakistan started with their own strength and weaknesses in terms of education, wealth, closeness to the British colonial rulers (serving under them and cooperating with them), population strength etc. and each tried to further their own interest helping members of their own group, and specifically non-Bengali's ganged up against Bengali's in the East Pakistan to make it a virtual colony. But things came to a head when Bengali's won majority in 1970 election using their population strength and was poised to upset the established order and thus become the dominant ethnic group. Indian govt. obviously was active in this muddy water to further their own interest and many elements within Bengali community may have been in communication with them thinking that we may need their help in the worst case scenario, which eventually we did need. Considering this, in your judgement, is it fair to call Bengali's Gaddar or traitors by today's Pakistani's for Bengali's actions before and during 1971?

If we cannot do that, then how can we justify the hateful posts by some Pakistani posters against Bangladeshi people in this forum, while the Mods look the other way. I should note that it is not just Pakistani's, Indians also take their liberty to insult and spew hatred against Bangladeshi's here and the Mods look the other way as well. We do not see this attitude of toleration of abuse towards any other nation here in this forum,except obviously their prime adversary nation of India.

Thanks for taking the time to write about your experience and share it with forum members.

 

[Danish saleem]

So? You think result of 47 war means anything today? What happened to operation gibraltar? How did that go for you?

Did we liberate half of Bangladesh and leave the other half with you? How long was India involved in Mukti Bahini support and what was the accomplished result? Compare to how long Pakistan has been supporting Kashmiri militants and terrorists (and sending its own to the mix)...and has there been any accomplished result?

You seriously think pakistan occupied kashmir from 1947 vintage is equivalent to losing more than half your country by population after gaining much American and Chinese help and support in 1971 when Pakistan had enough time to develop a serious military?

Yes it was a mistake by Nehru in 47 to run to the UN quite early, a stronger firmer leader would have let IA finish the job...there would be no dispute now.

But Pakistan has not been able to "liberate" the cultural and population heartland of Kashmir....something equivalent to Dhaka and Chittagong in Bangladesh. We came, we saw, we conquered all of it and let them set up their own country. Can Pakistan say the same of Kashmir which is calls its "jugular vein"?.....because Indian Kashmir is certainly not close to jugular vein of India....yet we still firmly hold it anyway.

Learn to live with that reality and accept either LoC will become the border eventually.....or if you choose to keep status quo instead.....understand that we will one day in the far future... take all of Kashmir back and split you up like in 1971 again in the process....given how India is growing now and will accelerate in the coming years.....and soon be adding multiples of Pakistan each year to its economy. Think what that will mean for India military budget in 10, 20 and 30 years time...and its relative ease of countering of any deterrent Pakistan might try to acquire/develop. Do you really want to have such a stance of stoic antagonism forever?

brother,

that my point , encouraging Mukti bhanis terrorist to fight against state, was the mistake , and same is now repeating in Kashmir.

 

[Sharpshooter12]

Excellent account of the 24 years between 1947-1971, in regards to my questions. It looks like at 1947 different ethnic groups in Pakistan started with their own strength and weaknesses in terms of education, wealth, closeness to the British colonial rulers (serving under them and cooperating with them), population strength etc. and each tried to further their own interest helping members of their own group, and specifically non-Bengali's ganged up against Bengali's in the East Pakistan to make it a virtual colony. But things came to a head when Bengali's won majority in 1970 election using their population strength and was poised to upset the established order and thus become the dominant ethnic group. Indian govt. obviously was active in this muddy water to further their own interest and many elements within Bengali community may have been in communication with them thinking that we may need their help in the worst case scenario, which eventually we did need. Considering this, in your judgement, is it fair to call Bengali's Gaddar or traitors by today's Pakistani's for Bengali's actions before and during 1971?

If we cannot do that, then how can we justify the hateful posts by some Pakistani posters against Bangladeshi people in this forum, while the Mods look the other way. I should note that it is not just Pakistani's, Indians also take their liberty to insult and spew hatred against Bangladeshi's here and the Mods look the other way as well. We do not see this attitude of toleration of abuse towards any other nation here in this forum,except obviously their prime adversary nation of India.

Thanks for taking the time to write about your experience and share it with forum members.

Kalu brother I know these questions were directed towards Kamal saab, but I just wanted to highlight a few things.

People of West Pakistan did not gang up in 70's election. If that would have been the case Bhutto's People's party would have had a clean sweep in that wing, but that was not the case unlike East Pakistan where Awami Leauge had a complete clean sweep.

AL won 160 seats, nearly all the contested national assembly seats in E.Pakistan.

While PPP won 81 seats in W.Pakistan, different sections of Muslim Leagues won total of 18 seats, different religious parties like Jui, JUP, JI won 18 seats while independents won 16 seats. Bhutto did not even get 2/3 majority in W.Pakistan, it was 81 PPP - 59 Other parties.

Similarly it was only the province of Punjab where PPP could form government single-handedly otherwise even in Sindh they did not had a clear majority. But in East Pakistan provincial assembly, AL won 288 of the 300 contested seats.

Regarding those traitor comments, it was a strong belief in the W.Pakistan that Mujib wanted to break Pakistan. Agartala case supported such belief. So when the Six Points were made public, it sounded like another move to break Pakistan. I mean you can see that these points actually meant Pakistan as a federation will cease to exist as the center will be only responsible for Defense and Foreign affairs, and even there both wings will have their own para-military forces and both can create separate trade links with foreign countries. That is pretty much what a sovereign nation do.

And then AL won the election on basis of these Six Points. So West wingers thought East wingers don't want to stay with Pakistan, then the stupidity of Yahya and outright treason of Bhutto and hardline of Mujib resulted in riots in Bengal, again stupidity prevailed there was a crack down and India intervened, Mukti Bahni was created, war broke out and you got your nation.

Now in all this how can a Pakistani not feel that Bangladeshis betrayed them, especially siding with Hindus our sworn enemies, just telling you the simple Pakistani mentality here not blaming anyone.

In all honesty it was the right of AL to form government because it had a clear mandate of Pakistan behind it. But do you think that it was a valid reason for breaking up Pakistan because AL's majority was not accepted. Well after 71 our army sent home 2 elected governments. They hanged one of the prime ministers, who was a Sindhi and the army chief was a Punjabi, this was seen as a Punjabi attempt to sideline Sindhis and there was resentment but Pakistan's survival was never really questioned by the PPP. Same was the case when Nawaz shariff was sent to Jeddah by Musharaf a Muhajir, again Pakistan's existence was not in question.

So a Pakistani thinks that why it was such a big issue for AL then, just because they were not getting a chance to form government in one election and it was not as if Bhutto was becoming the Prime minister in Pakistan in that scenario, was this reason enough to break your country. Is this what is called loyalty to your state. That is what is Pakistani mentality.

And then things like if we were together we would have been the 3rd largest population of the world. If united Pakistan's economy would have grown at same pace that it was growing pre-71 then we very well would have been a developed state by now far surpassing our large neighbor. So the 3rd largest population, with a strong economy and a nuclear power that would have demanded some respect but alas that was not the case.

So I wish your country best of luck and will request to find it in your heart to forgive those Pakistanis who give stupid Anti-Bengladeshi comments here. If you ever come to Pakistan you will find people are quite welcoming towards Bangladeshis and still consider them their brothers.

Random musings..or..fashionable self-righteousness: A Proud Bangladeshi in Pakistan

 

[khair_ctg]

Surrender ceremony photoshaped by Indians erasing presence of our rep, Gp Cap Khandokar.

i think it was for the better, to save us from shame that one of us (East Pakistanis) was a traitor playing part in having 70 million East Pakistanis colonized

Now in all this how can a Pakistani not feel that Bangladeshis betrayed them, especially siding with Hindus our sworn enemies, just telling you the simple Pakistani mentality here not blaming anyone.

a handful of East Pakistanis betraying was all that was needed for all East Pakistanis to pay the hefty price of getting colonized. East Pakistanis were the main victim. West Pakistan was not the one that was colonized. you see Bangladesh has been in a seriously autocratic state since 1971. we in Bangladesh are heavily brainwashed. you shouldn't be surprised that some Bangladeshis are brainwashed enough to say the myth that "East Pakistanis revolted to free from "Pakistan"". the term "Pakistan" here is assumed to be both the ideology/system East Pakistanis struggled to achieve and the boogeyman West Pakistan. the fact is, East Pakistan came under a commie-Brahmanic ideological takeover in 1971, and that was somewhat inevitable because of the Hindus' existing domination of East Bengal Muslims before 1947. East Pakistani Muslims were intellectually and militarily too weak to defend against Hindus/India.

i just hope people like you get the fact straight that the 1971 takeover of East Pakistan was a highly coordinated operation by India and USSR that hapless East Pakistani masses had nothing to do with.

 

[Nilgiri]

that my point , encouraging Mukti bhanis terrorist to fight against state, was the mistake , and same is now repeating in Kashmir.

Its not a mistake if it succeeds .

Kashmir insurgency is now a bygone era pretty much. Compare the situation now to what it was like in the 90s....and compare the resources at India's disposal today compared to back then. Our resolve has always been the same.

If Pakistan had the same logistics India enjoys in Kashmir and if E. Pakistan also had the level of insurgency found in Kashmir (which was not that much all things considered)....then 1971 probably would not have happened.

In the end you tried to do/impose too much, angered too many regular joes in the process, and you were too far away to achieve your goals.

Kashmir is completely different cup of tea I am afraid.

 

[bongbang]

Kalu brother I know these questions were directed towards Kamal saab, but I just wanted to highlight a few things.

People of West Pakistan did not gang up in 70's election. If that would have been the case Bhutto's People's party would have had a clean sweep in that wing, but that was not the case unlike East Pakistan where Awami Leauge had a complete clean sweep.

AL won 160 seats, nearly all the contested national assembly seats in E.Pakistan.

While PPP won 81 seats in W.Pakistan, different sections of Muslim Leagues won total of 18 seats, different religious parties like Jui, JUP, JI won 18 seats while independents won 16 seats. Bhutto did not even get 2/3 majority in W.Pakistan, it was 81 PPP - 59 Other parties.

Similarly it was only the province of Punjab where PPP could form government single-handedly otherwise even in Sindh they did not had a clear majority. But in East Pakistan provincial assembly, AL won 288 of the 300 contested seats.

Regarding those traitor comments, it was a strong belief in the W.Pakistan that Mujib wanted to break Pakistan. Agartala case supported such belief. So when the Six Points were made public, it sounded like another move to break Pakistan. I mean you can see that these points actually meant Pakistan as a federation will cease to exist as the center will be only responsible for Defense and Foreign affairs, and even there both wings will have their own para-military forces and both can create separate trade links with foreign countries. That is pretty much what a sovereign nation do.

And then AL won the election on basis of these Six Points. So West wingers thought East wingers don't want to stay with Pakistan, then the stupidity of Yahya and outright treason of Bhutto and hardline of Mujib resulted in riots in Bengal, again stupidity prevailed there was a crack down and India intervened, Mukti Bahni was created, war broke out and you got your nation.

Now in all this how can a Pakistani not feel that Bangladeshis betrayed them, especially siding with Hindus our sworn enemies, just telling you the simple Pakistani mentality here not blaming anyone.

In all honesty it was the right of AL to form government because it had a clear mandate of Pakistan behind it. But do you think that it was a valid reason for breaking up Pakistan because AL's majority was not accepted. Well after 71 our army sent home 2 elected governments. They hanged one of the prime ministers, who was a Sindhi and the army chief was a Punjabi, this was seen as a Punjabi attempt to sideline Sindhis and there was resentment but Pakistan's survival was never really questioned by the PPP. Same was the case when Nawaz shariff was sent to Jeddah by Musharaf a Muhajir, again Pakistan's existence was not in question.

So a Pakistani thinks that why it was such a big issue for AL then, just because they were not getting a chance to form government in one election and it was not as if Bhutto was becoming the Prime minister in Pakistan in that scenario, was this reason enough to break your country. Is this what is called loyalty to your state. That is what is Pakistani mentality.

And then things like if we were together we would have been the 3rd largest population of the world. If united Pakistan's economy would have grown at same pace that it was growing pre-71 then we very well would have been a developed state by now far surpassing our large neighbor. So the 3rd largest population, with a strong economy and a nuclear power that would have demanded some respect but alas that was not the case.

So I wish your country best of luck and will request to find it in your heart to forgive those Pakistanis who give stupid Anti-Bengladeshi comments here. If you ever come to Pakistan you will find people are quite welcoming towards Bangladeshis and still consider them their brothers.

Random musings..or..fashionable self-righteousness: A Proud Bangladeshi in Pakistan

BD wasnt created until unfashionable op searchlight happened. AL's forming gov was non issue. It happened on after the crack down on student,teachers,politicians,police and bengali armed forces. Today or tomorrow Bangladeshis would have created a separate entity but west pakistani ethnic army action moved things fast forward.

 

[khair_ctg]

Excellent account of the 24 years between 1947-1971, in regards to my questions. It looks like at 1947 different ethnic groups in Pakistan started with their own strength and weaknesses in terms of education, wealth, closeness to the British colonial rulers (serving under them and cooperating with them), population strength etc. and each tried to further their own interest helping members of their own group, and specifically non-Bengali's ganged up against Bengali's in the East Pakistan to make it a virtual colony. But things came to a head when Bengali's won majority in 1970 election using their population strength and was poised to upset the established order and thus become the dominant ethnic group. Indian govt. obviously was active in this muddy water to further their own interest and many elements within Bengali community may have been in communication with them thinking that we may need their help in the worst case scenario, which eventually we did need. Considering this, in your judgement, is it fair to call Bengali's Gaddar or traitors by today's Pakistani's for Bengali's actions before and during 1971?

If we cannot do that, then how can we justify the hateful posts by some Pakistani posters against Bangladeshi people in this forum, while the Mods look the other way. I should note that it is not just Pakistani's, Indians also take their liberty to insult and spew hatred against Bangladeshi's here and the Mods look the other way as well. We do not see this attitude of toleration of abuse towards any other nation here in this forum,except obviously their prime adversary nation of India.

Thanks for taking the time to write about your experience and share it with forum members.

i would highly disagree with the highlighted part. the divide between Bengalis and Mujahirs in EP was socio-economic. Bengalis were made handicapped by Hindu domination and were far behind in many areas compared to Muhajirs. market forces simply acted on those. Bengali Muslims were still getting influenced by the much more advanced Hindus. early into Pakistan's existence, Hindus and their Muslim commie partners launched anti-Urdu movement teaching Bengali Muslims that Urdu is not their language! whatever the goal, Bengali Muslims were dismembered from their own heritage and were separated from their non-Bengali brethren that was not the case before 1947 (the Hindus were working on the minds of both Bengali Muslims and Muhajir Muslims to cause rift). after 1947 probably if Hindus were not manipulating Bengali Muslims, the average Bengali Muslim would have accepted their lower position in society compared to the average Muhajir Muslim as a historical inheritance of Hindu domination that would need time to correct.

 

[asad71]

The Rediff Interview/Lt Gen A A Khan Niazi

February 02, 2004

After a series of stunning advances in December 1971, Indian forces routed Pakistan and liberated Bangladesh in less than two weeks. It was one of India's swiftest and most brilliant military campaigns that not only dismembered Pakistan, but became a lasting cause of humiliation for that country.

Triggered by the civil war in Pakistan -- pitting the West Pakistan army against the large Bengali-speaking East Pakistanis demanding greater autonomy -- India was swamped with 10 million Bengali refugees fleeing the crackdown in the east. Tensions reached a flashpoint when Pakistan President Yahya Khan ordered the attack on Indian air bases in Jammu and Punjab. In response, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi declared war at midnight, December 3.

Thirteen days later, Pakistani troops under Lieutenant General Ameer Abdullah Khan Niazi, surrendered. In charge of Pakistan's Eastern Command, General Niazi was blamed for the defeat and was removed from the army in 1975. Though the Hamoodur Rehman Inquiry Commission set up in Pakistan after the war -- parts of the report were officially released in 2001 -- had recommended his court-martial, General Niazi did not face a trial.

Three decades later, the 86-year-old and ailing General Niazi volunteered to face a court-martial to prove his innocence.

Born in 1915 in Balo-Khel, a village near Mianwali in the Punjab province of then India, General Niazi received 24 medals during his military service. He held various command positions: 5 Punjab during the 1965 war against India, 14 Para Brigade during operations in Azad Kashmir and Sialkot, and martial law administrator of Karachi and Lahore.

General Niazi, who passed away on Monday, spoke to India Abroad -- the largest circulated Indian-American newspaper, which is owned by rediff.com -- in December 2001. A rare interview conducted by Amir Mir.

The release of the Hamoodur Commission report has generated a fresh debate, with the public endorsing the recommendation for action against those army officers responsible for the 1971 debacle. How do you react?

I agree with the general public's demand that those responsible for the East Pakistan crisis, especially the uniformed ones, should have been punished. Having returned to Pakistan after the debacle, I volunteered to face court-martial proceedings. But my offer was denied by the then army chief, Tikka Khan. He did not want the Pandora's Box to be reopened. Any such action could have exposed the general headquarters' inept conduct of war and Tikka's role as army reserve commander. As a matter of fact, we were denied the right to self-defense before the Hamoodur Rehman Commission, which would not have been denied in a court-martial.

Under the Pakistan Army Act, you can cross-examine and call a witness in your support, especially when your character and reputation are at stake. Since such an opportunity would have exposed the GHQ's own weaknesses, we were never court-martialed. Even otherwise, had there been a court-martial, I would have been exonerated quite easily. The commission had agreed with my contention that the orders for surrender were given to me by President Agha Yahya Khan.

Sam Bahadur: General Depinder Singh on the hero of 1971

You say the commission had agreed with your contention that the surrender orders were given by President Yahya Khan. But the report released by the Musharraf regime holds you and a few other generals responsible for the debacle.

If I was responsible for such a big tragedy, why was I not court-martialed, although Tikka was out to damage me? Being the army chief, Tikka cancelled two squares of borderland allotted to me in Kasur. In his January 1991 statement published in an English daily, Tikka had stated: 'We even did not find any potential material against Lt Gen A A K Niazi, who surrendered to the Indian Commander, Lt Gen Jagjit Singh Aurora, because he had permission to surrender from Yahya Khan. But we did not take him back in the army and through an administrative action, retired him with normal benefits.'

You mean to say then President Yahya Khan was solely responsible for the fall of Dhaka and you were just following his orders?

No. Besides Yahya Khan, there were a few more personalities equally responsible for the East Pakistan crisis who have not been blamed in the report. The commission did not unravel the whole truth about various personalities and factors, which fuelled the separatist movement in East Pakistan and caused the final break-up of Jinnah's united Pakistan.

The report concludes there was no order to surrender. However, 'in view of the desperate picture' painted by you [being the commander of the Eastern Command], the higher authorities only gave you a consent to surrender, and that too, only if necessary. The report says that you could have disobeyed such an order if you thought you could defend Dhaka.

I swear on oath that I was given clear-cut orders from Yahya to surrender, but still I was determined to fight till the end. I even sent a message that my decision to fight till the end stands. However, General Abdul Hamid Khan and Air Chief Marshal Rahim rang me up, ordering me to act on the GHQ signal of December 14, 1971 because West Pakistan was in danger. It was at this stage that I was asked to agree on a cease-fire so that the safety of the troops could be ensured.

However, I still believe that had a counter-offensive been launched by the Pakistan Army Reserves, composed of two armored and three infantry divisions, Pakistan would have remained united and the war results would have been much different.

What do you say about the commission's findings that your troops in East Pakistan indulged in loot, arson, rape and killings?

Immediately after taking command in East Pakistan, I heard numerous reports of troops indulging in loot and arson, killing people at random and without reason in areas cleared of anti-state elements. Realizing the gravity of the situation, I approached my bosses through a letter dated April 15, 1971, informing them of the mess being created. I clearly wrote in my letter that there have been reports of rapes and even the West Pakistanis are not being spared. I informed my seniors that even officers have been suspected of indulging in this shameful activity.

However, despite repeated warnings and instructions, the respective commanders failed to curb this alarming state of indiscipline. And this trend definitely undermined our troops' battle efficiency.

How do you justify your failure as a military commander and do you accept responsibility for the Pakistan army's humiliating surrender in East Pakistan?

Our 45,000 troops were fighting against half a million Indian troops, lakhs of Mukti Bahinis (Bengali freedom fighters supported by India) and a hostile Bengali population. I actually needed around 300,000 troops to simply combat insurgency. By that time, we were already cut from the base but still fighting without any respite.

If Hamood thought we were on a picnic, he should have joined us. Let me make it clear that the army fought bravely under my command in East Pakistan. However, it was an unabated power struggle, which finally led to the 1971 debacle, especially when the barrel of the gun blocked the transfer of power.

The 1971 imbroglio was the outcome of an unabated struggle for power between Yahya, Mujib (founder of the Awami League, Sheikh Mujibur Rehman) and Bhutto (former Pakistan prime minister, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto). Yahya wanted to retain power while Bhutto wanted to attain it. This was despite the fact that Sheikh Mujib's Awami League had emerged victorious and he should have been handed over the government. Bhutto's fiery speeches were not mere rhetoric, but the actions of a desperate man vying for power at any cost. Had power been transferred to Mujib, Pakistan would have remained united. However, it is pity that the commission absolved Bhutto of any blame.

'The troops were excellent, but the Pakistani leadership was very poor:' General Kuldip Singh Brar on the Bangladesh war

The commission recommended that a coterie of generals be publicly tried for the 1971 debacle. However, General Tikka, Sahibzada Yaqoob Ali Khan (former commander of Eastern Command) and Rao Farman Ali (advisor to Niazi) were exonerated. Were they were innocent?

I don't agree with the commission's act of exonerating these three. It is surprising that no responsibility for the break-up of Pakistan has been apportioned to Tikka, Yaqoob and Farman. In fact, Yaqoob's inaction as commander of the eastern command resulted in aggravating the situation in East Pakistan. Having messed up everything, Yaqoob deemed it fit to desert his post and resign, while taking cover behind his conscience. He should have been sent to the gallows for betraying the nation. Yahya demoted him. However, Bhutto restored his rank and sent him as ambassador to the USA. What a prize for desertion!

The Hamoodur Commission exculpated him, thus paving ground for officers to resign instead of fighting out the enemy, whenever a difficult situation develops. Similarly, Tikka has not been mentioned in the report, although his barbaric action of March 25 earned him the name of butcher. The commission overlooked his heinous crimes.

As far as Rao Farman is concerned, he was in-charge of the Dhaka operations.

Why didn't the Bhutto government make the Hamoodur Report public?

Bhutto was afraid of making it public given the fact that he was equally responsible for the circumstances that finally led to the dismemberment of Pakistan. A sub-committee of seven Bhutto aides was permitted to have a glance at the report. The committee recommended that the report should not be made public. Bhutto later used his powers to modify 34 pages of the report.

You insist that the Hamoodur Report is faulty, partial and influenced by Bhutto. On the other hand, no one in the corridors of power seems ready to court-martial the generals responsible for the Dhaka debacle. With this in mind, do you have any solid suggestion to bring the culprits to task?

To find out the truth about the 1971 debacle and punish the guilty, it is essential to appoint a new commission with wider terms of reference. This exercise should be presided over by the chief of army staff. Two syndicates should take part.
It would be a very interesting exercise, with many useful lessons to be learned. A military exercise should also be held to find out how and why the small, tired and ill-equipped eastern garrison completed all the given tasks under the worst possible conditions against overwhelming odds, and why the western garrison, with enough forces and resources and having the initiative, failed and lost 5,500 square miles of territory in less than 10 days under conducive conditions.

After my return to Pakistan from Indian captivity in 1974, while preparing my report on the East Pakistan debacle, I heard persistent hints from GHQ sources that the Eastern Command had been sacrificed according to a detailed plan, and that its senior commanders were made the scapegoats for the loss of East Pakistan. My initial doubts turned into conviction when, over the years, I pondered over this episode and discussed it with people who knew that the GHQ Eastern Command had been deliberately cheated, tricked and misled as part of a grave conspiracy by the high command.

In fact it was so obvious that even the Indian Major General Shah Beg Singh told me, "Your goose is cooked, sir. They have decided to put the whole blame on you and your command for this episode." I am therefore convinced that the fall of East Pakistan was deliberately engineered.

Can you substantiate your contention that the East Pakistan debacle was deliberately engineered?

Yahya and Bhutto viewed Mujib's victory in the 1970 election with distaste, because it meant that Yahya had to vacate the presidency and Bhutto had to sit in the Opposition benches, which was contrary to his aspirations. So these two got together and hatched a plan in Larkana, Bhutto's hometown, which came to be known as the Larkana Conspiracy. The plan was to postpone the session of the National Assembly indefinitely, and to block the transfer of power to the Awami League by diplomacy, threats, intrigues and the use of military force.

Connected to this conspiracy was the 'M M Ahmed plan', which aimed at allowing Yahya and Bhutto to continue as president and prime minister, besides leaving East Pakistan without a successor government. After the announcement of the date of the assembly session (to be held at Dhaka), there was pressure on the politicians to boycott it. The reason given was that East Pakistan had become a hub of international intrigue, therefore, it should be discarded.

In the end, this clique achieved its aim.

Don't you think that the time has come for India and Pakistan to shun their differences and enter into a peace dialogue for the betterment of the masses?

We should never trust India. Successive Indian governments have never reconciled to the idea of a strong Pakistan and have always tried to weaken our country. Previous records show that India has always damaged Pakistan. Whenever they get a chance in future, they would never spare Pakistan. Even now in Kashmir, India has more than hundreds of thousands of troops, killing innocent Muslims in the name of fighting militants.

Even otherwise, Pakistan cannot enter into a peace dialogue with India until and unless the latter gives a commitment to resolve the Kashmir dispute in accordance with United Nations resolutions.

If given a chance, would you like to play a role in the ongoing diplomatic efforts for a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute?

No. I would rather prefer to be even with India. Though I am too old to fight now, I am still ready to command Pakistani troops in Jammu and Kashmir to fight Indian troops.


'We should never trust India'

 

[Danish saleem]

Its not a mistake if it succeeds .

Kashmir insurgency is now a bygone era pretty much. Compare the situation now to what it was like in the 90s....and compare the resources at India's disposal today compared to back then. Our resolve has always been the same.

If Pakistan had the same logistics India enjoys in Kashmir and if E. Pakistan also had the level of insurgency found in Kashmir (which was not that much all things considered)....then 1971 probably would not have happened.

In the end you tried to do/impose too much, angered too many regular joes in the process, and you were too far away to achieve your goals.

Kashmir is completely different cup of tea I am afraid.

Brother,

I hope u r right but when ever Indian prime minster visited Kashmir, why Kashmir i leaders arrested ?

 

[Nilgiri]

I hope u r right but when ever Indian prime minster visited Kashmir, why Kashmir i leaders arrested ?

Bro,

Not all their leaders are separatists (look at the ones that participate in Indian politics). Even former separatists (like Sajjad Lone) have joined the political process now.... some are even BJP allies.

Remaining separatists will be silenced (house arrest or whatever) during such a visit for the greater calm and order of the society whenever it is needed. They are free to talk whatever they want afterwards. They are also free to leave to Pakistan.

You are free to deal with your separatists in your own country (in Balochistan) as well however you want. We will deal with ours.

 

[Md Akmal]

Excellent account of the 24 years between 1947-1971, in regards to my questions. It looks like at 1947 different ethnic groups in Pakistan started with their own strength and weaknesses in terms of education, wealth, closeness to the British colonial rulers (serving under them and cooperating with them), population strength etc. and each tried to further their own interest helping members of their own group, and specifically non-Bengali's ganged up against Bengali's in the East Pakistan to make it a virtual colony. But things came to a head when Bengali's won majority in 1970 election using their population strength and was poised to upset the established order and thus become the dominant ethnic group. Indian govt. obviously was active in this muddy water to further their own interest and many elements within Bengali community may have been in communication with them thinking that we may need their help in the worst case scenario, which eventually we did need. Considering this, in your judgement, is it fair to call Bengali's Gaddar or traitors by today's Pakistani's for Bengali's actions before and during 1971?

If we cannot do that, then how can we justify the hateful posts by some Pakistani posters against Bangladeshi people in this forum, while the Mods look the other way. I should note that it is not just Pakistani's, Indians also take their liberty to insult and spew hatred against Bangladeshi's here and the Mods look the other way as well. We do not see this attitude of toleration of abuse towards any other nation here in this forum,except obviously their prime adversary nation of India.

Thanks for taking the time to write about your experience and share it with forum members.

@ Definitely not ! We, rather majority supported Awami Leaque because we wanted to be at par with West Pakistan. We wanted a little bit change in the ruling class. We never dreamed that Bengali leadership (AL) can do like that.We were at trap what to do once we gave our vote. Of course, the situation could have been better and different if Pakistan Military junta had handed over power in time.At least Mujib was not that threat to united Pakistan.

@ There was an another factor working at that time, most of the young generation those (Bengali) who were in civil administration were progressive (left oriented) minded. Another mistake was done by Ayub himself, at the later stage of his rule, all civil service heads in East Pakistan including Police were Bengali. This was done by Ayub to please Mujib as Mujib also demanded for the re-repatriation of Bengali civil servant from West Pakistan and posted to areas where non-Bengali civil servant were posted. So, on the eve of General Election of 1970, the whole Civil Administration of East Pakistan including the Police were in Mujib's favour. Besides, Student & youth organization of Mujib was very powerful. No, rightist political parties like Jammat-e-Islami, Muslim Leaque, Nizam-e-Islami and also the pro-Chinese political parties were allowed to do election campaign. People say, it was free & fare, my foot ! Every where Awami youth were there. It was a election of one sided, election of intimidation, just waiting for the time to pass and declare the result. Even Yahya had a secret relation with Mujib. Armed Forces were told not to wary. Every one used to make a link with Mujib whether he was Bengali, Biharee or West Pakistani's staying in East Pakistan. Mujib was already crowned before he was elected.

@ At the Centre, Yahya's Chief Cabinet Secretary/Adviser was a Bengali (Ghuhar Ayub). The Chief Election Commissioner was a Bengali (Justice Satter. Ex President, before Ershad). The Chief Justice was a Bengali (Justice Hamidur Rahman).

@ All ex-rightist Ministers, MNA, MP's used to visit Military camps for neutral favour but they also kept mum. Most of the young Armed Forces officers who were in East Pakistan also aligned with Mujib and many mate with him secretly.

@ And my best friend RAW's were in every where. It was not necessarily, RAW's original members were in East Pakistan, there were many even millions.There main job was to creates hurdle in negotiating with Mujib and Military. US Ambassador has already physically mate with Mujib and warned to be in shoes within united frame work of Pakistan. Pro-Bhutto General were making conspiracy, Bhutto was making conspiracy, only Yahya and Mujib were talking. Even, Mujib was not allowed to talk with Yahya after 18/19 March 1971. He was just there to say hello. Beharee killing had already started, news came to Mujib but he was unable to do anything. Repeatedly he was requesting Yahya to arrest him and finally they arrested him. On 04 April 1971 Dr Kamal Hossain surrendered to his brother-in-law (Sindi speaking) at Dacca. On interrogation, he confessed had not he surrendered at that period then he would had been killed by RAW--

@ The last point about the hatred of present Pakistani young generation towards Bangladesh. In the true sense Pakistan never had an interest about Bengal rather we joined with them for our security reason. They were always weak in history. and political thinking. You have not heard the great saying, "What Bengal thinks today, India thinks tomorrow" and Pakistan thinks, day after tomorrow. " Bache logo ko kheh ne do ". I found even during Pakistan's time they had a very shallow knowledge about Bengal. They always wanted a clean exchange of Bengal with Kashmir.Had East Bengal got her independence from British in 1947 then our faith could had been like Hydra bad.. You have to understand who all are these young generation in this forum ? They are the relatives of those who lost their life in East Bengal, they are those whose relatives are still missing--?????
Give me a break ---------

 

[Sharpshooter12]

The last point about the hatred of present Pakistani young generation towards Bangladesh. In the true sense Pakistan never had an interest about Bengal rather we joined with them for our security reason. They were always weak in history. and political thinking. You have not heard the great saying, "What Bengal thinks today, India thinks tomorrow" and Pakistan thinks, day after tomorrow. " Bache logo ko kheh ne do ". I found even during Pakistan's time they had a very shallow knowledge about Bengal. They always wanted a clean exchange of Bengal with Kashmir.Had East Bengal got her independence from British in 1947 then our faith could had been like Hydra bad.. You have to understand who all are these young generation in this forum ? They are the relatives of those who lost their life in East Bengal, they are those whose relatives are still missing

Well that is actually true. Even during the Pakistan movement there were not many Punjabi, Sindhi, Baloch or Pathan politicians that were in fore-front of it. Other than Sardar Abdul Rab Nashtar, I don't think I can find any other Pakistani politician that was part of the Muslim League top-brass that consisted mostly of people from UP or Bengal, even Quaid e Azam although was born in Karachi actually belonged to Gujarat. Most of the Pakistani politicians actually worked against the movement like the Unionists of Punjab or Khudai Khidmatgars of NWFP. Later on when they saw the mood swinging in the favor of Pakistan they jumped in Muslim League. So the lack of Political Acumen was and perhaps is there in Pakistan.

My father who served in PN in East Pakistan and was a POW, used to say as a joke that it was good that you guys were nationalists and kept the name of your new nation as Bangladesh. Otherwise you were the majority and actually created Pakistan, you could have easily kept the name and we would have had to look for a new name.

I can't really explain how great it is to read your posts, they are like a window into that dark chapter of our history and I have learned a lot.

If you have time, please explain how do think it would have worked had Mujib was transferred the power and he had implemented his six points. I think that would have ended the federation of Pakistan, and would have created a loose confederation among the two wings. What are your thoughts, were those points feasible?

i would highly disagree with the highlighted part. the divide between Bengalis and Mujahirs in EP was socio-economic. Bengalis were made handicapped by Hindu domination and were far behind in many areas compared to Muhajirs. market forces simply acted on those. Bengali Muslims were still getting influenced by the much more advanced Hindus. early into Pakistan's existence, Hindus and their Muslim commie partners launched anti-Urdu movement teaching Bengali Muslims that Urdu is not their language! whatever the goal, Bengali Muslims were dismembered from their own heritage and were separated from their non-Bengali brethren that was not the case before 1947 (the Hindus were working on the minds of both Bengali Muslims and Muhajir Muslims to cause rift). after 1947 probably if Hindus were not manipulating Bengali Muslims, the average Bengali Muslim would have accepted their lower position in society compared to the average Muhajir Muslim as a historical inheritance of Hindu domination that would need time to correct.

I don't know if it was just a myth or reality, but I heard that many of the teachers in E.Pakistan were Hindus. And they used to purposefully incite hatred towards the West Pakistanis into the mind of their pupils. Like a math teacher used to teach his students simple subtraction by giving examples like, East Pakistan earned 10 Rupees and West Pakistan took 7 of them, how many are we left with.

I don't know much about how it was in the rest of departments, but the small percentage of Bengali Muslims in armed forces had its historical reasons. As I said earlier after the WW2, 55 percent of British Indian army consisted of Punjabis, Pathans and Balochs. So naturally when Pakistan came into being as we inherited the Muslim part of that army, it mostly consisted of Punjabi muslims, Pathans and Balochs. This trend was hard to change within 24 years. As even today in India Punjab which is 2.4% of the population contributes more than 10% of the soldiers while West Bengal which is 7.8% of the Indian population contributes only 3.6%. These trends change with the time, 24 years is a too small a time-frame to expect dramatic changes.
The shadow of the ‘Martial Race’ theory in the Indian Army – Does it still exist? | The Morning Media Project

 

[kalu_miah]

Kalu brother I know these questions were directed towards Kamal saab, but I just wanted to highlight a few things.

People of West Pakistan did not gang up in 70's election. If that would have been the case Bhutto's People's party would have had a clean sweep in that wing, but that was not the case unlike East Pakistan where Awami Leauge had a complete clean sweep.

AL won 160 seats, nearly all the contested national assembly seats in E.Pakistan.

While PPP won 81 seats in W.Pakistan, different sections of Muslim Leagues won total of 18 seats, different religious parties like Jui, JUP, JI won 18 seats while independents won 16 seats. Bhutto did not even get 2/3 majority in W.Pakistan, it was 81 PPP - 59 Other parties.

Similarly it was only the province of Punjab where PPP could form government single-handedly otherwise even in Sindh they did not had a clear majority. But in East Pakistan provincial assembly, AL won 288 of the 300 contested seats.

Regarding those traitor comments, it was a strong belief in the W.Pakistan that Mujib wanted to break Pakistan. Agartala case supported such belief. So when the Six Points were made public, it sounded like another move to break Pakistan. I mean you can see that these points actually meant Pakistan as a federation will cease to exist as the center will be only responsible for Defense and Foreign affairs, and even there both wings will have their own para-military forces and both can create separate trade links with foreign countries. That is pretty much what a sovereign nation do.

And then AL won the election on basis of these Six Points. So West wingers thought East wingers don't want to stay with Pakistan, then the stupidity of Yahya and outright treason of Bhutto and hardline of Mujib resulted in riots in Bengal, again stupidity prevailed there was a crack down and India intervened, Mukti Bahni was created, war broke out and you got your nation.

Now in all this how can a Pakistani not feel that Bangladeshis betrayed them, especially siding with Hindus our sworn enemies, just telling you the simple Pakistani mentality here not blaming anyone.

In all honesty it was the right of AL to form government because it had a clear mandate of Pakistan behind it. But do you think that it was a valid reason for breaking up Pakistan because AL's majority was not accepted. Well after 71 our army sent home 2 elected governments. They hanged one of the prime ministers, who was a Sindhi and the army chief was a Punjabi, this was seen as a Punjabi attempt to sideline Sindhis and there was resentment but Pakistan's survival was never really questioned by the PPP. Same was the case when Nawaz shariff was sent to Jeddah by Musharaf a Muhajir, again Pakistan's existence was not in question.

So a Pakistani thinks that why it was such a big issue for AL then, just because they were not getting a chance to form government in one election and it was not as if Bhutto was becoming the Prime minister in Pakistan in that scenario, was this reason enough to break your country. Is this what is called loyalty to your state. That is what is Pakistani mentality.

And then things like if we were together we would have been the 3rd largest population of the world. If united Pakistan's economy would have grown at same pace that it was growing pre-71 then we very well would have been a developed state by now far surpassing our large neighbor. So the 3rd largest population, with a strong economy and a nuclear power that would have demanded some respect but alas that was not the case.

So I wish your country best of luck and will request to find it in your heart to forgive those Pakistanis who give stupid Anti-Bengladeshi comments here. If you ever come to Pakistan you will find people are quite welcoming towards Bangladeshis and still consider them their brothers.

Random musings..or..fashionable self-righteousness: A Proud Bangladeshi in Pakistan

It seems brother that I am a person with not too much knowledge in these matters and had held many varied opinions based on different findings at different times. I would refer your questions rather to two more senior and experienced posters @Md Akmal and @asad71 who can answer them based on their personal life experience.

 

[khair_ctg]

My father who served in PN in East Pakistan and was a POW, used to say as a joke that it was good that you guys were nationalists and kept the name of your new nation as Bangladesh. Otherwise you were the majority and actually created Pakistan, you could have easily kept the name and we would have had to look for a new name.

I can't really explain how great it is to read your posts, they are like a window into that dark chapter of our history and I have learned a lot.

I salute your honourable father for his service to the East Pakistani people. it's unfortunate what happened to him and entire East Pakistan. if East Pakistanis democratically had any say in the matters, United Pakistan would have stayed United Pakistan. even if East Pakistanis wanted to split from West in their own will, they wouldn't have split from their very identity as Pakistan and Pakistanis.

i learned somewhat about the socio-politics of that time conversing with my older family members who were East Pakistani and also lived in West Pakistan for some time. but yes @Md Akmal your posts are a real gem. they are eye opening for a younger person like me.

I don't know if it was just a myth or reality, but I heard that many of the teachers in E.Pakistan were Hindus. And they used to purposefully incite hatred towards the West Pakistanis into the mind of their pupils. Like a math teacher used to teach his students simple subtraction by giving examples like, East Pakistan earned 10 Rupees and West Pakistan took 7 of them, how many are we left with.

I don't know much about how it was in the rest of departments, but the small percentage of Bengali Muslims in armed forces had its historical reasons. As I said earlier after the WW2, 55 percent of British Indian army consisted of Punjabis, Pathans and Balochs. So naturally when Pakistan came into being as we inherited the Muslim part of that army, it mostly consisted of Punjabi muslims, Pathans and Balochs. This trend was hard to change within 24 years. As even today in India Punjab which is 2.4% of the population contributes more than 10% of the soldiers while West Bengal which is 7.8% of the Indian population contributes only 3.6%. These trends change with the time, 24 years is a too small a time-frame to expect dramatic changes.
The shadow of the ‘Martial Race’ theory in the Indian Army – Does it still exist? | The Morning Media Project

it was very much a reality. and saying just teachers were Hindus is an understatement.

Hindus were socio-economically and culturally several classes above Muslims by 1940s in Bengal. 99% money lenders, and 90% landowners and big zamindars were Hindus. we still have many old zamindar bari's in Bangladesh, styled in a mix of Brahman and Victorian designs, all belonging to former powerful Hindu zamindars. Muslims at the same time were heavily into agriculture with few powerless nawabs and Muslim zamindars here and there. come 1947 independence of East Pakistan, even though many Hindus left East Bengal, the remnants and even the Hindus that left for India were obviously wielding heavy influence and pulling strings in the leftist politics of East Pakistan. Hindus could not tolerate that peasant Bengali Muslims were now sovereign in their own entity determining their own fate and identity. Hindus found a boogeyman after 1947 in the form of West Pakistan they could divert the sentiments of backward susceptible Bengali Muslims against (and Hindus were directly or indirectly working on Muhajirs/West Pakistanis as well to turn them against Bengali Muslims). these phenomenons, very importantly aided by an aggressive Indian intelligence and military operation, are exactly what led to Hindu-commie takeover of East Pakistan and exactly what you see in the form of Bangladesh. today's Bangladesh is a Hindu-Brahmanic system although with a Muslim majority population.

what you said about the ethnic representations in United Pakistan military are exactly what I have been writing from time to time on this forum. i agree @asad71 and @Md Akmal are great resources on Bengali Muslim military participation in their own national armed forces between 1947 and 1971.

i wrote earlier Bengali Muslims should have accepted their position below Muhajir Muslims in East Pakistan as a natural phenomenon. i believe Bengali Muslims overwhelmingly did just that. Bengali Muslims were overwhelmingly patriotic people even amid political suppression of their heritage and identity by Muslimphobic leftist, and many of us have lost touch with our heritage and identity over time till today. most of the noise before 1971 was made by a small percentage of powerful influential leftist radicals and RAW agents. after 1971 it is still that very group that writes our history. don't let those India-leaning agents define us as former East Pakistanis and today's Bangladeshis.