History of the looting of the Indian army in the war of liberation , and reasons of helping us (Bangladesh)

[Baibars_1260]

I could not help but notice the obvious contradiction in your statement.

Too much emphasis on "gifts", it hardly seems likely as a routine affair to an invading army.
And yet, you contradict by saying the Indian army "ALLOWED" them.
How can something be "ALLOWED" if the "GIFTS" were being given by choice.

I put the word "gift " in quotation marks for a reason. No, these "gifts" were not by choice. It was the situation that demanded a compromise. For the IA troops it was an opportunity based on a mix of wheeling dealing, and empathy based on rough linguistic affinity (Example The Bihar Regiment was in Chittagong, Cox's Bazaar, ). The "gift" in quotation marks is actually a bribe, but one given willingly just as motorists back home will try to avoid a police fine by "settling" the matter. I agree the word "allowed" could have been better phrased .
A family trying to escape being massacred and keeping their daughters safe would do anything and an Indian civil intermment was far preferable to being publicly bayoneted before seeing your daughter's dishonored.

One can understand, in an atmosphere of extreme stress and fear, incidents of giving things probably occurred, but to classify those as "GIFTS" or as widely practiced is very far-fetched. Unless the sources are purely Indian.

I have already explained the reasons why West Pakistani civilians preferred going into Indian captivity than remain unprotected in Bangladesh. They would likely survive and be repatriated. Unlike Bangladesh India was a UN member and a signatory to the Geneva convention and all the international laws covering internment of enemy nationals, In theory only even the Indian constitution guarantees equality under law of "human rights " to all present within the territory regardless of status. Under international law the Indian Army was not supposed to fraternize with enemy civilians and these civilians in a foreign territory were not their responsibility. They could have abandoned them to their fate and gone back to India. This did not happen. Not because of goodness of heart, but partly because India was concerned about its image in the world, and partly because more internees meant a better bargaining "goodwill" gesture with Pakistan. So in addition to the. 55, 000 armed forces personnel in uniform who surrendered ( of which only 45,000 were combatants), a large number of civilians were "taken prisoner ". Note, the quotes here in the words "taken prisoner". West Pakistani civilians wanted to be "taken prisoner" by India. This is analogous to the situation in World War 2 when German soldiers and civilians preferred to surrender to the US and British armies rather than the Soviet Union.
There is a huge amount of documentation how India began the process of transfer, and repatriation of Pakistani civilians, and injured, or sick Pakistani POWs as early as April 1972, completely ignoring Bangladesh and its strident protests. Search for "SYND - 72" AP archives and you will see video footage of the repatriations.

I can go to the street, put a knife to someone and demand cash, then see a watch and ask would you mind if I take that as well, the person is hardly going to say no, but I cannot claim afterward that it was a "GIFT". because I took the cash by force, but the watch was "GIFTED" to me.

I can only speak for what happened in Dhaka ( Dacca ) city, as all my sources are from there. The West Pakistani civilian populations were scattered in the city in individual homes unlike the armed forces personnel who were living in Dhaka Cantt with their families. There were no "pockets" in the city except perhaps, Mohammedpur, Lalmatia, Mirpur, and perhaps Banani ( not sure ). There was no way the Indian troops would have known each and every family in a relatively large city especially as there was a chance of confusion between "bi-lingual" Calcutta origin Bengalis and West Pakistanis . The local Bengali population knew and the process of rape, massacre, and loot had started immediately before and after the fall of the city. Ironically it was through the incidents of looting and massacre by the MB and the riff raff criminals in a city ravaged by Civil War that the Indian Army got to know which were the exact homes that belonged to Pakistanis. They then began visiting these homes, initially out of curiosity ( the rough linguistic affinity helped ), and later to strike a deal. Like the corrupt traffic cop the soldiers began to strike deals .From my anecdotal sources only there were no instances of Indian Army troops barging into a Pakistani home, ransacking it after shooting tye occupant ( which happened frequently in areas under the Bangladeshi forces control. Which is why all accounts of the plight of Pakistani civilians published in Urdu journals and magazines
later, make no mention of the Indian Army actions .
The Pakistani Indian Armed Forces relationship was a two way process. The "knife" was the threat of being stranded and left to the mercy of a state without any control or adherence to international norms, or the choice of leaving with the occupation forces withdrawal. At that time many Pakistanis thought India would stay on and integrate East Pakistan and as "Indian citizens" they would be no worse off than Indian Muslims. The biggest shock the Pakistani civilian population got was when they learned that the Indian troops would be going home.

The West Pakistani armed forces personnel were safe, because despite the optics India had allowed them to retain their small arms after the surrender till such time as sufficient troops could be brought in to maintain law and order. In any case these soldiers
explained above were covered by the Geneva convention and were entitled to repatriation.
The Pakistani civilian population was not entitled to anything, not even physical protection which was the responsibility of the Mukti Bahini ( ) under the Bangladesh "government" .

Post-1971, India was getting an extremely bad image internationally, and the Congress led government in power in India was likely to face a backlash from its Muslim voters in the crucial states of West Bengal, UP and Bihar , many of whom had relatives still surviving in East Pakistan ( Bangladesh). So , India violated international law by interfering in the "internal affairs" of a sovereign nation which itself had created. Through a mixture of corruption, a nod and a wink , every one of the upper class Pakistani civilians were brought home numbering tens of thousands. Pakistanis preferred to "gift " their consumer goods bought with their salaries to the Indian army rather than leave them to be looted after they left along with the withdrawal of Indian forces in February 1972. Their posh homes in Gulshan and Dhanmondi were ransacked after the Indian Army withdrawal.

You've presented a sadly strange version of events, something highly unbelievable.

Unbelievable? My anecdotal discussions with the families in Bahadurad, Sharfabad, and North Karachi, have told me this. I visited Dhaka briefly to actually see the homes of these people who left. Note that I am referring to those upper and upper middle class families who all made it safely out. The labor class went into the Geneva and Mirpur refugee camps.

Here is one proof.
No where in the Urdu accounts or other journals written by the families is there any mention of looting by Indian troops. The looting was done by the MB and general criminals.

 

[DalalErMaNodi]

↑ Superb Fairy Tale.

 

[peagle]

Thank you.
This is the Baibars, I know, on pdf, what you have said makes a lot of sense and a lot more believable than what you had started earlier, and I'll explain why below.
Words matter, how a story is told matters because it can very easily present the contrarian view to the one in the head of the writer.

I put the word "gift " in quotation marks for a reason. No, these "gifts" were not by choice. It was the situation that demanded a compromise. For the IA troops it was an opportunity based on a mix of wheeling dealing, and empathy based on rough linguistic affinity (Example The Bihar Regiment was in Chittagong, Cox's Bazaar, ). The "gift" in quotation marks is actually a bribe, but one given willingly just as motorists back home will try to avoid a police fine by "settling" the matter. I agree the word "allowed" could have been better phrased .
A family trying to escape being massacred and keeping their daughters safe would do anything and an Indian civil intermment was far preferable to being publicly bayoneted before seeing your daughter's dishonored.

"Gift" is an extremely poor choice of word because it totally changes the meaning, whether in a quotation mark or not, it gives a different impression that's inescapable. and your post prior to that also had been far too lenient in the historical assessment of the Indian army, without sound basis.

Urdu would be, (i apologise if my roman Urdu is not up to the mark)
Hum ney tu unn ko tofay ki taran day diiay, does not mean given as a gift, in English the word gift would not apply if an actual meaning of the sentence is to be presented. In literal sense tofa is gift, but used in the wrong context, in a different langue, in a different discussion, the meaning is changed. That's unfair and very important if we are to be fair to our own version of events.
I hope you understand my previous concerns.

I have already explained the reasons why West Pakistani civilians preferred going into Indian captivity than remain unprotected in Bangladesh. They would likely survive and be repatriated. Unlike Bangladesh India was a UN member and a signatory to the Geneva convention and all the international laws covering internment of enemy nationals, In theory only even the Indian constitution guarantees equality under law of "human rights " to all present within the territory regardless of status. Under international law the Indian Army was not supposed to fraternize with enemy civilians and these civilians in a foreign territory were not their responsibility. They could have abandoned them to their fate and gone back to India. This did not happen. Not because of goodness of heart, but partly because India was concerned about its image in the world, and partly because more internees meant a better bargaining "goodwill" gesture with Pakistan. So in addition to the. 55, 000 armed forces personnel in uniform who surrendered ( of which only 45,000 were combatants), a large number of civilians were "taken prisoner ". Note, the quotes here in the words "taken prisoner". West Pakistani civilians wanted to be "taken prisoner" by India. This is analogous to the situation in World War 2 when German soldiers and civilians preferred to surrender to the US and British armies rather than the Soviet Union.
There is a huge amount of documentation how India began the process of transfer, and repatriation of Pakistani civilians, and injured, or sick Pakistani POWs as early as April 1972, completely ignoring Bangladesh and its strident protests. Search for "SYND - 72" AP archives and you will see video footage of the repatriations.

I can agree with much here, although you try to justify too much, the reasons were very clear, they went in to defeat and demoralise Pakistan. They always had plans to take prisoners, so I wouldn't get into the Indian constituional rights and all the rubbish. If constitutional rights and international commitments were so important to the Indians, they would not have killed nearly 1000,000 Kashmiris, people in the north-east and so many other atrocities within their own country.

It was an invading army that took advantage of a domestic situation. We could have done the same to them in 1962. over justification of why they did or did not do something does not apply, when the answer is straightforward.

I can only speak for what happened in Dhaka ( Dacca ) city, as all my sources are from there. The West Pakistani civilian populations were scattered in the city in individual homes unlike the armed forces personnel who were living in Dhaka Cantt with their families. There were no "pockets" in the city except perhaps, Mohammedpur, Lalmatia, Mirpur, and perhaps Banani ( not sure ). There was no way the Indian troops would have known each and every family in a relatively large city especially as there was a chance of confusion between "bi-lingual" Calcutta origin Bengalis and West Pakistanis . The local Bengali population knew and the process of rape, massacre, and loot had started immediately before and after the fall of the city. Ironically it was through the incidents of looting and massacre by the MB and the riff raff criminals in a city ravaged by Civil War that the Indian Army got to know which were the exact homes that belonged to Pakistanis. They then began visiting these homes, initially out of curiosity ( the rough linguistic affinity helped ), and later to strike a deal. Like the corrupt traffic cop the soldiers began to strike deals .From my anecdotal sources only there were no instances of Indian Army troops barging into a Pakistani home, ransacking it after shooting tye occupant ( which happened frequently in areas under the Bangladeshi forces control. Which is why all accounts of the plight of Pakistani civilians published in Urdu journals and magazines
later, make no mention of the Indian Army actions .
The Pakistani Indian Armed Forces relationship was a two way process. The "knife" was the threat of being stranded and left to the mercy of a state without any control or adherence to international norms, or the choice of leaving with the occupation forces withdrawal. At that time many Pakistanis thought India would stay on and integrate East Pakistan and as "Indian citizens" they would be no worse off than Indian Muslims. The biggest shock the Pakistani civilian population got was when they learned that the Indian troops would be going home.
India was getting an extremely bad image internationally, and the Congress led government in power in India was likely to face a backlash from its Muslim voters in the crucial states of West Bengal, UP and Bihar , many of whom had relatives still surviving in East Pakistan ( Bangladesh).
The West Pakistani armed forces personnel were safe, because despite the optics India had allowed them to retain their small arms after the surrender till such time as sufficient troops could be brought in to maintain law and order.
When the
explained above, it was because

I would rather not comment here because, this is starting to go off-topic (thread), but comparing the situation to a traffic cop seems rather unfair. I truly respect your knowledge and understanding, but we can all be guilty of arriving at the wrong conclusions, especially when our conclusions rarely get challenged, a challenge need not be with new information but evaluation of existing scenarios and information. I think that would apply here.
By no means I want to be disrespectful towards you, but for sake of honesty and fairness, I think there are certain viewpoints lacking in fair conclusions in the statement above.

In my anecdotal discussions with the families in Bahadurad, Sharfabad, and North Karachi,

Thank you.
As I stated above, language can get lost in translation, I have had many experiences of that in my life, as I'm sure as have you, especially among South Asians, more so among some communities.

 

[Baibars_1260]

And, no one, I mean no one gifts their prized possession, such as a car, they would have hoped to get it back later or burned it, rather than hand it over to an invading force.

The only way anything would be given is out of fear, or to bargain some sort of favour, either of those situations is not classified as gifts, but looting.

Curious case of cars. The babus at the Dhaka Motor Vehicles office made money hand over fist transferring titles to "Hijackers".
Many Pakistanis hoped to use their cars to drive over to India but with wrecked bridges and MB checkpoints those who few who attempted this came to a horrible fate. The word "Hijacker" was in parlance in Bangladesh till quite recently when a "freedom fighter" would simply "requisition" the car by asking for the keys at gunpoint.

The Pakistan Army disabled almost all the Toyota jeeps and vehicles leaving very little for the Indian Army, who would not have been able to maintain them anyway.
Pakistani civilians did not destroy or disable their official vehicles ( example a railway engineer in Parbatipur ), but some attempted to destroy their vehicles before departing with the Indian troops. These were small vehicles, like Datsuns, Minis, Volkswagons. With a dire balance of payments problem from 1972-1975 Bangladesh could not import spares to keep these cars running and even when Hijacked they deteriorated at the hands of their new owners.

 

[peagle]

@Pakistanis that are here trolling Bangladeshis.

you guys are making enemies out of people unnecessarily. all because of 1971 which was 50 years ago.

50.

years.

ago.

Bangladesh and Bangladeshis arent perfect, just like Pakistan and Pakistanis arent perfect. they have their flaws, we have our flaws. this endless cycle of trolling and counter trolling is making the wrong usage of people-to-people contact and creating distances with a potential ally, and its not like we have loads of them. as time passes Pakistan and Bangladesh are going to become natural allies. so its better to be reasonable with Bangladesh and Bangladeshi so that they get a good and fair image of us, instead of them thinking we are just like the indians. if we ever want Pakistan to become a leader nation in the muslim world, we should understand our own shortcomings and other muslim nations (like Bangladesh) and learn to help them get over it instead of troll, because its not like we are perfect.

Prophet Muhammed: “A Muslim is the brother of a fellow-Muslim. He should neither commit oppression upon him nor ruin him, and he who meets the need of a brother, Allah would meet big needs, and he who relieved a Muslim from hardship Allah would relieve him from the hardships to which he would be put on the Day of Resurrection, and he who did not expose (the follies of a Muslim) Allah would conceal his follies on the Day of Resurrection.” Sahih Muslim (Book 032, Number 6250)

FOR ALL PAKISTANIS, who have forgotten.

Please remember, we are Pakistanis, ONLY because our Bengali brothers and sisters were with us when we were fighting for our rights and our freedom.
WITHOUT THEM, Pakistan would not have been possible.

Please read the history of the Muslim League, and the struggle for independence, it will not take long for you to realise.

Just because we parted in bad ways, does not mean you forget your past and the bond written in BLOOD. Please do not forget, Bengalis also spilled blood in sacrifice for Pakistan, and they did it happily.

To forget that is too low for me to put in words.
So, please,
think before you act,
think before you speak,
think before you write.

Thank you.

Curious case of cars. The babus at the Dhaka Motor Vehicles office made money hand over fist transferring titles to "Hijackers".
Many Pakistanis hoped to use their cars to drive over to India but with wrecked bridges and MB checkpoints those who few who attempted this came to a horrible fate. The word "Hijacker" was in parlance in Bangladesh till quite recently when a "freedom fighter" would simply "requisition" the car by asking for the keys at gunpoint.

The Pakistan Army disabled almost all the Toyota jeeps and vehicles leaving very little for the Indian Army, who would not have been able to maintain them anyway.
Pakistani civilians did not destroy or disable their official vehicles ( example a railway engineer in Parbatipur ), but some attempted to destroy their vehicles before departing with the Indian troops. These were small vehicles, like Datsuns, Minis, Volkswagons. With a dire balance of payments problem from 1972-1975 Bangladesh could not import spares to keep these cars running and even when Hijacked they deteriorated at the hands of their new owners.

You have proven three points in this post,

that you have such vast knowledge,
the reason why I enjoy reading your posts,
and, why interpretation matters, Pakistanis would never give cars to the Indians willingly. Hence, my reasons to disrupt your thinking in my little way. But, as they say, history, especially wars are always complicated.

 

[Baibars_1260]

If constitutional rights and international commitments were so important to the Indians, they would not have killed nearly 1000,000 Kashmiris, people in the north-east and so many other atrocities within their own country.

There was a different India 50 years back. In fact the Bangladesh saga was hyped to the Kashmiris that they were better off in a "democratic " India than under Pakistani martial law which resulted in the death of so many of Pakistan's own citizens. Which is why Kashmir remained peaceful throughout the conflict

India then as of now wished the destruction of Pakistan, but on different terms. India wanted Pakistan with the people.
There was no Hindutva then. Post 1971 the harsh military realities came to light.

comparing the situation to a traffic cop seems rather unfair. I truly respect your knowledge and understanding, but we can all be guilty of arriving at the wrong conclusions, especially when our conclusions rarely get challenged, a challenge need not be with new information but evaluation of existing scenarios and information. I think that would apply here.
By no means I want to be disrespectful towards you, but for sake of honesty and fairness, I think there are certain viewpoints lacking in fair conclusions in the statement above.

Likewise, I respect your opinion, I will conclude by pointing out that I used the word "corrupt " traffic cop.
This is a very painful saga in our history so let's end on a cheerful note.

This will NEVER happen again ,

 

[magra]

Possible :

A vicious conquering army that seeks a "1000 year old vengeance " would obviously subject women of the enemy population to the most horrible treatment. In the eyes of the common soldier it didn't matter if the women were from a population officially an ally. Indian Pakistani wars are basically over religion, not territory.
Look what the Indian Army COAS had to say about treatment of Pakistani women if captured.
So Manekshaw was mildly rebuking rape of Pakistani women for international optics, and uses the word "Begum" a term commonly used in Bangladesh.

No significant population centers fell to the Indian Army on the western front so Manekshaw was referring to Bangladesh ( then East Pakistan).

Have not heard till date of any one raising the rape charge on Indian troops in 1971. Bangladesh level those charges on Pak army.
Pak army and civilians in East Pak sing praise of Indian army professionalism. Would they have done it if Indian army was raping them?

 

[peagle]

There was a different India 50 years back. In fact the Bangladesh saga was hyped to the Kashmiris that they were better off in a "democratic " India than under Pakistani martial law which resulted in the death of so many of Pakistan's own citizens. Which is why Kashmir remained peaceful throughout the conflict

India then as of now wished the destruction of Pakistan, but on different terms. India wanted Pakistan with the people.
There was no Hindutva then. Post 1971 the harsh military realities came to light.

Come on, we will never end, lol
I honestly have learnt quite a lot from reading your posts, its a pleasure.

But this alternate India story, in my opinion, is pure BS, something that has stuck in people's minds, especially our people of a certain period.

Without going too deeply into it,
let's not forget the Gujrat killings of 1969, over 1000 Muslims killed and much more,
Nehru almost begged Ayub not to attack, I have a copy of the letter, might share it here at some stage, but backstabbed Pakistan in 1971, that's not pure intentions, neither is it a noble India.

There a lot more, but, I've mentioned before, interpretation matters and we have been very poor at interpreting our history, our side of the story and have too willingly accepted a certain false version.

Till another thread and another post,
stay healthy and stay happy.

 

[magra]

You keep him, we don't want snakes in our country, have quite a few native ones as is.

With pleasure. An honest and intelligent enemy is always welcome.

 

[DalalErMaNodi]

With pleasure. An honest and intelligent enemy is always welcome.

Then why are so many Indians aggrieved by their Muslim compatriots... Smh.

 

[Baibars_1260]

Have not heard till date of any one raising the rape charge on Indian troops in 1971. Bangladesh level those charges on Pak army.
Pak army and civilians in East Pak sing praise of Indian army professionalism. Would they have done it if Indian army was raping them?

There are no recorded instances of rape by the Indian army of West Pakistani women in Bangladesh .
My response was to a boast by one of your countrymen that the Indian army had raped Pakistani women.
Manekshaw's directive however is suspicious and as to why it was even needed, No such directive has been given by any COAS ever since in all operations including the IPKF campaign in Sri Lanka ( the only other large scale deployment of Indian armed forces on foreign territory) or various peacekeeping operations under UN auspices,

 

[magra]

let's not forget the Gujrat killings of 1969, over 1000 Muslims killed and much more,
Nehru almost begged Ayub not to attack, I have a copy of the letter, might share it here at some stage, but backstabbed Pakistan in 1971, that's not pure intentions, neither is it a noble India.

Please show us the copy. Nehru died in 1964. Surely, his ghost wrote that letter in 1969.

Then why are so many Indians aggrieved by their Muslim compatriots... Smh.

Troublemakers make the most noise. Majority Indians have no issues with their Muslim compatriots, but they keep quiet.

 

[magra]

There are no recorded instances of rape by the Indian army of West Pakistani women in Bangladesh .
My response was to a boast by one of your countrymen that the Indian army had raped Pakistani women.
Manekshaw's directive however is suspicious and as to why it was even needed, No such directive has been given by any COAS ever since in all operations including the IPKF campaign in Sri Lanka ( the only other large scale deployment of Indian armed forces on foreign territory) or various peacekeeping operations under UN auspices,

May be he was aware that human nature can be tempted, and victory is a drug which temporary blinds you of your follies. Hence he may have warned the army. Also west Pakistanis are more Indian looking, so it is easier to look at them as suitable partners, then say a Sri Lankan or an African (UN peacekeeping force).

 

[peagle]

Please show us the copy. Nehru died in 1964. Surely, his ghost wrote that letter in 1969.

Troublemakers make the most noise. Majority Indians have no issues with their Muslim compatriots, but they keep quiet.

Just like most Indians, I have met here and in my life, always delusional and deliberately misrepresenting people's statements.

When did I say the letter was written in 1969?

I was obviously referring to the 1962 war, when China whopped India's backside and you went begging to the world, crying for aid. and the Americans gave you nearly a billion dollars worth of weapons.

I won't show the letter here, that's for another time and another thread.
This thread is for Bengalis to discuss the issue in the heading, and it has already gone too far off-topic.

Regarding another of your above posts.
Pakistanis prefer to move on and look forward, that's why you do not hear much from them in general, but an increasing number are saying enough is enough, its time to speak up, that's why you are hearing about it more openly now.


Open another thread, and we can discuss until your heart's content, and will happily share the letter, among others, they are a historical fact.

 

[magra]

Just like most Indians, I have met here and in my life, always delusional and deliberately misrepresenting people's statements.

When did I say the letter was written in 1969?

I assumed your statements to be in chronological order. You talked about 1969 riots and then followed by Nehru writing the letter. Be clear from next time.

I was obviously referring to the 1962 war, when China whopped India's backside and you went begging to the world, crying for aid. and the Americans gave you nearly a billion dollars worth of weapons.

India was militarily weak in 1962, as we under-invested in military till then believing that we could live in peace with our neighbors. We can say that we were fooled by the Chinese and genuinely thought Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai.
So, yes, it was wise of Nehru to swallow his pride and ask Ayub Khan to not attack India when it was dealing with Chinese.