No one is asking you to live any other world other than your choosing.But it is a common knowledge that, non western events don't get the same attention like the western one.Pundits have long termed this phenomenon as 'Euro centric bias'. Even after discounting that bias, 1971 war got fairly decent amount of attention.I can see a large number of books in English language written by both south Asian writers and western writers either singularly focused or discussed as a part of international relation among the countries involved in it.Just because, you didn't found a single book in a 'Malaysian library' doesn't mean it does not exist.What if, books were in that library, but you overlooked? Can you claim, you have checked every book in that library?Tell me at first how many books were there?
You are looking at it from a political/civilian point of view. Mine is from the military. Something akin to a BDA. Understand the difference. And it wasn't some 'Malaysian library'. It happened to be an international book retailer which is situated under the Petronas Towers. And yes, I did check. And even if there are, it is insufficient.
It is laughable that, you are giving example of Sun Tsu's 'The Art of War'(5th century BC) with that of 1971 war,Are you really expecting a book like 'The Art of War' to be written based on 1971 war? That book is a classical literature have similar significance like that of Plato's 'Republic' or Kautilya's 'Arthashastra'.San Tsu didn't focused any singular war in Chinese history, he wrote his book on a broader pattern of warfare in ancient and classical China.That book and like that of above mentioned two are part of world literary heritage.They were written at the dawn of human civilization.Expecting anything like that for 1971 is a little far fledged.Isn't it?
A great piece of non-Western literature that every able commander/diplomat should have. So where is this 'Euro bias' you say it is? There are books on non-Western theaters of war. I would say there is a lack of research into not only 1971, but all South Asian wars in general. It is not that people are 'Euro-biased', it is bias coming from a certain group of people over the decades. This needs to stop.
Excuse of geography is one which Pakistani apologist like to give when confront the realities of gross injustice and repression carried out by Pakistani military junta.Hadn't Bengalis joined Pakistan despite knowing geographic distance? Had East Bengal were connected to west Pakistan geographically and west Pakistani rulers carried out same type of discrimination, ethnic prejudice and exclusion, do you think we would have not revolted? During the 24 years period, had any Bengali complained about geographic distance? Or they were complaining about the injustice?
There's truth in the discrimination part. Particularly in regards to jobs. Very few Bengalis spoke Urdu, and were not part of a labor force. There would have been some sort of opposition, no doubt. There was linguistic and ethnic bias, no doubt.
There had been discrimination in other countries. Did we see the African-Americans demanding their own country? Or the Welsh due to their language? I have seen Tamils who do not speak Hindi, and yet are Indians first. The Sikhs went through a bloody period under Operation Bluestar, and yet are patriotic to this day.
So discrimination due to language/ethnicity justifying a separate nation? Maybe. But that can be mitigated by have a strong law and actually letting the civilian do his/her job.
The mistake the Pakistanis made then and even today is that they let their military take care of their matters. They do not let their civilians do their jobs. You don't let the civilians do their jobs, the country won't move forward. There must be a clear barrier between the military and the civilian society.
Does geographic distance beget injustice? Then what about the many current successful states around the world who are geographically fragmented? Old Pakistan were 2 part with common religion.Indonesia is 17,000 part with diverse culture, religion, language.Some Christian majority province of Indonesia is as far distant from Jakarta as were between East and West Pakistan.Or what about East Malaysia and West Malaysia? They are not only geographically separated but also have different linguistic and religious majority with East Malaysia is a lot of less Bhumiputra and more Christian than Wast Malaysia which contain Kuala Lampur.How they are surviving? May be they have formulated a just and workable federal system early on their country's foundation? Had anything happened with Pakistan like this? They monopolize all the power at the center from the day one for just one objective.To rule East Pakistan like a colony and exploit it as much as possible.So how do you expect that union to survive? Or all these were not important, only geography decided?
You forgot one thing. The countries you mentioned do not have a big hostile neighbor. And actually, Indonesia went through a lot till where it is now. Very complicated stuff. Oh wait, there's East Timor. Geography does matter.
If you don't know, Pakistanis already have written a lot of books on 1971 from their perspective.More are welcome.My objection was not for your claimed suggestion to your Pakistani friends about this.But your notion that, Bangladesh is only independent because of Pakistani military failure at the hands of India and Bangladeshi people were passive spectator, had no desire for independence or control over the course of the events.Which I found offensive and you have decided for that reason that I am intolerant to opposing view?
Well whatever they are writing is not enough. I wouldn't say that East Pakistanis or rather, Bangladeshis were a 'passive spectator' (seriously, what is with all these labels?).
Just understand that without the Indian naval blockade of Karachi, the training of Mukti Bahini, intervention of the USSR and Shabeg Singh's tactics, Bengalis alone with some old rifles would not have been enough to quell the West Pakistanis. The Indians clearly did have a clear cut strategy. They made certain that there were minimal, or no opposition to their military advance to Dhaka as the civil war was raging. And it worked. So by not supporting the Pakistani military, would I say the Bengalis were merely a 'passive spectator'? No, they spoke their minds, and that alone was more than sufficient. What more would you want?
Had those not happened, they would have surely been annihilated by the Pakistanis and perhaps their allies. Now that's called a good strategy.
It is a funny contradiction, Whenever you say anything which we know to be against the truth and accepted facts based on historic realities, it is your 'seeing from different angle and mutual respect and understanding' but if I object that proposition and give some counter argument than I am 'intolerant, nationalistic and less educated'? Perhaps, Jews should not contradict the claim of Holocaust denier and question the deniers honesty? If they do then they are intolerant, less educated and ultra jewish nationalist.Right? Well you may claim, Bengali people's suffering is not like that important of jew or other nationalities who suffered past injustice, or even not true at all.
Truth, accepted facts and historic realities? From where Bangladesh stands now, sorry, not buying it. And actually, the nationalist Jews are an intolerant lot. Just look at them...
I do not claim to be a very educated person, I just tell what I consider to be right in my view point. No dispute about your sermon on Knowledge, value, humanity and mutual respect.But moral relativism which you are propagating here in this forum looks very ugly when there is a clear aggressor and victim in that said events and a huge power imbalance.One is a powerful militaristic state hellbent of crushing opposition and others are unarmed civilian population. Moreover a section of population who acted like Quisling during the war and still roaming free and propagating similar views like that you.So it became a little difficult to engage in debate without questioning the allegiance of that person towards his motherland.You know, questioning about allegiance is the 'lack of education' even if that questioned person is Golam Azam.Right?
Yes we know about a minority who doesn't claim to be the representative of Bangladesh despite living here and being granted citizenship.Nothing new.We are seeing them since 1971.
You should really let go party politics you know.
Yes, I am a representative of Bangladesh and we will go ahead no matter what.I don't know about whether Bangladesh will be 'powerful and Influential' But we will strive hard to make it poverty free, illiteracy free, corruption free with decent living standard and a dignified position among the family of nations.There will always be naysayer, but cultivating a dream and working to fulfill that is what count.There will be ups and downs,but the spirit of a determined nation doesn't extinguished that easily.
Well good luck on that. You (your party) will need it.
And just so you know, I just don't like your party. And I regret voting for it in the past. Your politics bore me. BNP? What am I going to do with a woman who passed 7th grade? She's of no value to me.
Time for changes, and yes there will be downs, but with a goal of strong nation where everyone can lead their lives in security and peace. And that is something that a majority of Bangladeshis would gladly comply with. And that is by saying 'Yes' for change. Get that into your mind.
Fish and Rice joke will also help.
