Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
Ahead of Bangladesh's liberation in 1971, the Pakistani Army systematically committed genocide" of the Hindu community in the then East Pakistan and the Nixon Administration kept a blind eye to it, a new book says.
While the Indian Government was aware of it, it tried to play it down and instead referred to it as genocide against the Bengali community in Bangladesh so as to avoid an outcry from the leaders of the then Jan Sangh, the predecessor of the today's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, says Gary J Bass, author of the book 'The Blood Telegram: Nixon Kissinger and a Forgotten Genocide', which recently hit the book stores."Rather than basing this accusation primarily on the victimisation of Hindus, India tended to focus on the decimation of the Bengalis as a group," Bass, who is a professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University, says.
"The Indian foreign ministry argued that Pakistan's generals, having lost an election because their country had too many Bengalis, were now slaughtering their way to 'a wholesale reduction in the population of East Bengal' so that it would no longer comprise a majority in Pakistan," said Bass.
As the Pakistan Army continued with the systematic targeting of the Hindu community, the book says, Indian officials did not want to provide further ammunition to the irate Hindu nationalists in the Jana Sangh party.
"From Moscow, D P Dhar, India's ambassador there, decried the Pakistan army's preplanned policy of selecting Hindus for butchery, but, fearing inflammatory politicking from rightist reactionary Hindu chauvinist parties like Jana Sangh, he wrote, We were doing our best not to allow this aspect of the matter to be publicised in India," Bass writes in his book.
The then US Consul General in Dhaka, Archer Blood, according to the book, thought, no logic to this campaign of killings and expulsions of the Hindus, who numbered about ten million — about 13 per cent of East Pakistan's population.
"They were unarmed and dispersed around East Pakistan. But the Hindus were tainted by purported association with India, and were outliers in a Pakistani nation defined in Muslim terms," he wrote.
"Lieutenant General Tikka Khan, the military governor leading the repression, argued that East Pakistan faced enslavement by India. He said that the outlawed Awami League would have brought the destruction of our country which had been carved out of the subcontinent as a homeland for Muslims after great sacrifices," the book said.
It noted that "senior officers like the COAS [chief of army staff] and CGS [chief of general staff] were often noticed jokingly asking as to how many Hindus have been killed."
"One lieutenant colonel testified that Lieutenant General A A K Niazi, who became the chief martial law administrator in East Pakistan and head of the army's Eastern Command, asked as to how many Hindus we had killed. In May, there was an order in writing to kill Hindus from a brigadier."
Another lieutenant colonel said, "There was a general feeling of hatred against Bengalis amongst the soldiers and the officers including generals. There were verbal instructions to eliminate Hindus", the book says.
The then US diplomats based in Dhaka wrote to both the State Department and the White House that this was nothing less than genocide against the Hindus.
"But for all the effort that Blood put into defining and documenting genocide, the terrible term had no impact at the White House," Bass writes.
According to Bass, Blood thought that "genocide" was the right description for what was happening to the Hindus.
"He explained that the Pakistani military evidently did not make distinctions between Indians and Pakistan Hindus, treating both as enemies."
Such anti-Hindu sentiments were lingering and widespread, Blood wrote.
According to the book, the Indian government privately believed, as this aide noted, that Pakistan, by "driving out Hindus in their millions," hoped to reduce the number of Bengalis so they were no longer the majority in Pakistan, and to destroy the Awami League as a political force by getting rid of the wily Hindu who was supposed to have misled simple Bengali Muslims into demanding autonomy."
"In India we have tried to cover that up," Swaran Singh (the then External Affairs Minister) candidly told a meeting of Indian diplomats in London, "but we have no hesitation in stating the figure to foreigners."
"Singh instructed his staff to distort for their country: We should avoid making this into an Indo-Pakistan or Hindu-Muslim conflict. We should point out that there are Buddhists and Christians besides the Muslims among the refugees, who had felt the brunt of repression."
The Indian government feared that the plain truth would splinter its own country between Hindus and Muslims, Bass writes.
Bass says the Nixon administration had ample evidence not just of the scale of the massacres, but also of their ethnic targeting of the Hindu minority— what Blood had condemned as genocide.
The then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once told the president himself, "Another stupid mistake he [Yahya] made was to expel so many Hindus from East Pakistan. In fact, the then US Ambassador to India told Richard Nixon in a meeting at the Oval office that their ally 'Pakistan' was committing genocide.
"In the Oval Office, the ambassador directly told the president of the United States and his national security advisor that their ally was committing genocide. The reason that the refugees kept coming, at a rate of 150,000 a day, was because they're killing the Hindus."
"Neither Nixon nor Kissinger said anything," the book says.
Nixon kept quiet on Hindu genocide by Pak Army: Book
‘The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide’ by Gary J. Bass
By Neil Sheehan,
Neil Sheehan, who spent three years in Vietnam as a war correspondent, is the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of “A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam” and “A Fiery Peace in a Cold War: Bernard Schriever and the Ultimate Weapon.”
We seem to live in an era of massacres. More than 500,000 Tutsis were hacked to death by their Hutu ethnic rivals in Rwanda in 1994. The following year, more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslims were shot to death by the Bosnian Serb army at Srbrenica. In Syria, more than 100,000 are dead, and more keep dying in massacres large and small by bullet, shell, bomb and poison gas.
Now Gary J. Bass, a journalist and professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton, has come forth with “The Blood Telegram,” a profoundly disturbing account of the hitherto hidden role of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger in the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of inhabitants of East Bengal (subsequently the nation of Bangladesh) and the making of 10 million refugees during Pakistan’s civil war in 1971. Apparently no precise figure is available for the deaths, but Bass cites a CIA and State Department estimate of about 200,000 midway through the killing.
The partition of British India in 1947 into mainly Hindu and mainly Muslim areas created a bifurcated Pakistan in a bizarre configuration that was a recipe for political instability and military dictatorship. West Pakistan was forged from the Muslim-dominated provinces on the western side of the subcontinent, while East Pakistan was created on the other side from the chiefly Muslim province of East Bengal. Roughly 1,000 miles of India lay between. East and west shared virtually nothing except religion.
Serious trouble began in 1970 when the president of Pakistan, Gen. Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan, permitted a national election. The winner was a charismatic Bengali leader named Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rahman and his Awami League. Mujib enraged the army leadership, whose troops were drawn almost entirely from the Punjab and other western provinces and had no affection for the Bengalis, by publicly advocating autonomy for both wings under a federal system, while privately promoting secession and independence for East Bengal.
On the night of March 25, 1971, Yahya Khan launched a ferocious crackdown. The orgy of murder, rape and mayhem went on for months, focusing in genocidal fashion on the minority of Bengali Hindus regarded as most friendly to Pakistan’s enemy, India.
Nixon and Kissinger, his national security adviser, have sought to draw a curtain of silence over their role by omitting or glossing over the atrocities in their memoirs. Bass has defeated the attempted coverup through laborious culling of relevant sections of the Nixon White House tapes, declassified State Department documents and interviews with former officials, American and Indian, who were involved.
Archer Blood, the U.S. consul general in 1971 in Dhaka, the principal city of East Bengal, and his staff were horrified by the violence. Their reports to the State Department in Washington described the killings in gruesome detail and urged the strongest possible intervention to try to bring the carnage to an end. Pakistan’s generals were highly susceptible to pressure from Washington. Virtually their entire military, from the F-86 Sabre jet fighters in the air force to the armored, artillery and infantry contingents, was equipped with American weaponry and depended on the United States for the ammunition and spare parts required to keep it operating.
But the consulate’s cables met with what Blood later called a “deafening” silence from Washington. With the Bengalis being killed by American weapons wielded by an American-sponsored army, and Washington doing nothing to try to stop it, the United States had become complicit in the massacre.
In desperation, Blood’s younger staffers drew up a “dissent cable,” a Vietnam War-initiated reform in the Foreign Service meant to allow diplomats to speak out, confidentially but frankly, against official policy. Bass calls it “the Blood telegram” after its most important signatory — and as a double-entendre title for the events the book recounts. The cable accused the Nixon administration of “moral bankruptcy” and demanded action to stop the murders “in order to salvage our nation’s position as a moral leader of the free world.” Twenty members of the consulate staff signed the cable, a “roll call of honor,” as Blood put it. As the senior man, he had the most to lose by signing, and lose he did in the years to come.
What Blood and his young associates did not know was that Nixon and Kissinger were using Yahya Khan as a secret communications channel to Mao Zedong’s China. It was Yahya Khan who would arrange Kissinger’s clandestine trip to China in July 1971 to prepare the way for Nixon’s epochal visit there in February 1972. Nixon and Kissinger were determined to let nothing interfere with their enterprise to checkmate the Soviet Union in the Cold War by turning China into a friend of the United States. The cables from Blood’s consulate about this inconvenient massacre in East Bengal infuriated both men.
And there was more stroking their anger. They loathed India because the Indians had adopted a neutral position in the Cold War and then turned to the Soviet Union to obtain weapons, which they could not get from the United States, to fight Pakistan. To Nixon, the Indians were “a slippery, treacherous people.” To Kissinger — who comes across as a cold-blooded practitioner of realpolitik given to rages when he doesn’t get his way — the Indians were “insufferably arrogant,” with “convoluted minds.” At one point on the tapes, Nixon remarks, “The Indians need — what they really need is a” — Kissinger interjects, “They’re such bastards.” And then the president finishes his thought: “a mass famine.”
Nixon had a particular animus, a dislike that was mutual, toward Indira Gandhi, the prime minister and daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru, a founder of India and its first prime minister and greatest statesman.
Rather than seeking to restrain the Pakistani military, Nixon and Kissinger did all they could to strengthen it for the open clash with India that loomed because of the bloodshed in East Bengal. Once the fighting started, Bass recounts that, in a precursor to Watergate, the two men knowingly broke U.S. law by approving the transfer to Pakistan of American-supplied F-104 Starfighter jet interceptors from Jordan and Iran, then still under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. John Mitchell, Nixon’s attorney general and subsequently one of the major figures convicted in the Watergate scandal, was in the room at the time of the decision and made no objection. In the end, the Indian army decisively defeated the Pakistani forces, liberating East Bengal and fostering the birth of Bangladesh.
After reading Bass’s account of this shameful episode, one has to ask if preservation of the secret conduit to China via Pakistan was worth the lives of more than 200,000 Bengalis. Mao clearly wanted to do business with the United States, and some other channel presumably could have been found. One has to conclude that where the Bengalis were concerned, Kissinger and Nixon simply did not give a damn. And one has to wonder too, what had happened to the America that once stood for liberty, justice and decency.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...5130-1fc9-11e3-b7d1-7153ad47b549_story_1.html
While the Indian Government was aware of it, it tried to play it down and instead referred to it as genocide against the Bengali community in Bangladesh so as to avoid an outcry from the leaders of the then Jan Sangh, the predecessor of the today's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, says Gary J Bass, author of the book 'The Blood Telegram: Nixon Kissinger and a Forgotten Genocide', which recently hit the book stores."Rather than basing this accusation primarily on the victimisation of Hindus, India tended to focus on the decimation of the Bengalis as a group," Bass, who is a professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University, says.
"The Indian foreign ministry argued that Pakistan's generals, having lost an election because their country had too many Bengalis, were now slaughtering their way to 'a wholesale reduction in the population of East Bengal' so that it would no longer comprise a majority in Pakistan," said Bass.
As the Pakistan Army continued with the systematic targeting of the Hindu community, the book says, Indian officials did not want to provide further ammunition to the irate Hindu nationalists in the Jana Sangh party.
"From Moscow, D P Dhar, India's ambassador there, decried the Pakistan army's preplanned policy of selecting Hindus for butchery, but, fearing inflammatory politicking from rightist reactionary Hindu chauvinist parties like Jana Sangh, he wrote, We were doing our best not to allow this aspect of the matter to be publicised in India," Bass writes in his book.
The then US Consul General in Dhaka, Archer Blood, according to the book, thought, no logic to this campaign of killings and expulsions of the Hindus, who numbered about ten million — about 13 per cent of East Pakistan's population.
"They were unarmed and dispersed around East Pakistan. But the Hindus were tainted by purported association with India, and were outliers in a Pakistani nation defined in Muslim terms," he wrote.
"Lieutenant General Tikka Khan, the military governor leading the repression, argued that East Pakistan faced enslavement by India. He said that the outlawed Awami League would have brought the destruction of our country which had been carved out of the subcontinent as a homeland for Muslims after great sacrifices," the book said.
It noted that "senior officers like the COAS [chief of army staff] and CGS [chief of general staff] were often noticed jokingly asking as to how many Hindus have been killed."
"One lieutenant colonel testified that Lieutenant General A A K Niazi, who became the chief martial law administrator in East Pakistan and head of the army's Eastern Command, asked as to how many Hindus we had killed. In May, there was an order in writing to kill Hindus from a brigadier."
Another lieutenant colonel said, "There was a general feeling of hatred against Bengalis amongst the soldiers and the officers including generals. There were verbal instructions to eliminate Hindus", the book says.
The then US diplomats based in Dhaka wrote to both the State Department and the White House that this was nothing less than genocide against the Hindus.
"But for all the effort that Blood put into defining and documenting genocide, the terrible term had no impact at the White House," Bass writes.
According to Bass, Blood thought that "genocide" was the right description for what was happening to the Hindus.
"He explained that the Pakistani military evidently did not make distinctions between Indians and Pakistan Hindus, treating both as enemies."
Such anti-Hindu sentiments were lingering and widespread, Blood wrote.
According to the book, the Indian government privately believed, as this aide noted, that Pakistan, by "driving out Hindus in their millions," hoped to reduce the number of Bengalis so they were no longer the majority in Pakistan, and to destroy the Awami League as a political force by getting rid of the wily Hindu who was supposed to have misled simple Bengali Muslims into demanding autonomy."
"In India we have tried to cover that up," Swaran Singh (the then External Affairs Minister) candidly told a meeting of Indian diplomats in London, "but we have no hesitation in stating the figure to foreigners."
"Singh instructed his staff to distort for their country: We should avoid making this into an Indo-Pakistan or Hindu-Muslim conflict. We should point out that there are Buddhists and Christians besides the Muslims among the refugees, who had felt the brunt of repression."
The Indian government feared that the plain truth would splinter its own country between Hindus and Muslims, Bass writes.
Bass says the Nixon administration had ample evidence not just of the scale of the massacres, but also of their ethnic targeting of the Hindu minority— what Blood had condemned as genocide.
The then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once told the president himself, "Another stupid mistake he [Yahya] made was to expel so many Hindus from East Pakistan. In fact, the then US Ambassador to India told Richard Nixon in a meeting at the Oval office that their ally 'Pakistan' was committing genocide.
"In the Oval Office, the ambassador directly told the president of the United States and his national security advisor that their ally was committing genocide. The reason that the refugees kept coming, at a rate of 150,000 a day, was because they're killing the Hindus."
"Neither Nixon nor Kissinger said anything," the book says.
Nixon kept quiet on Hindu genocide by Pak Army: Book
‘The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide’ by Gary J. Bass
By Neil Sheehan,
Neil Sheehan, who spent three years in Vietnam as a war correspondent, is the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of “A Bright Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and America in Vietnam” and “A Fiery Peace in a Cold War: Bernard Schriever and the Ultimate Weapon.”
We seem to live in an era of massacres. More than 500,000 Tutsis were hacked to death by their Hutu ethnic rivals in Rwanda in 1994. The following year, more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslims were shot to death by the Bosnian Serb army at Srbrenica. In Syria, more than 100,000 are dead, and more keep dying in massacres large and small by bullet, shell, bomb and poison gas.
Now Gary J. Bass, a journalist and professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton, has come forth with “The Blood Telegram,” a profoundly disturbing account of the hitherto hidden role of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger in the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of inhabitants of East Bengal (subsequently the nation of Bangladesh) and the making of 10 million refugees during Pakistan’s civil war in 1971. Apparently no precise figure is available for the deaths, but Bass cites a CIA and State Department estimate of about 200,000 midway through the killing.
The partition of British India in 1947 into mainly Hindu and mainly Muslim areas created a bifurcated Pakistan in a bizarre configuration that was a recipe for political instability and military dictatorship. West Pakistan was forged from the Muslim-dominated provinces on the western side of the subcontinent, while East Pakistan was created on the other side from the chiefly Muslim province of East Bengal. Roughly 1,000 miles of India lay between. East and west shared virtually nothing except religion.
Serious trouble began in 1970 when the president of Pakistan, Gen. Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan, permitted a national election. The winner was a charismatic Bengali leader named Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rahman and his Awami League. Mujib enraged the army leadership, whose troops were drawn almost entirely from the Punjab and other western provinces and had no affection for the Bengalis, by publicly advocating autonomy for both wings under a federal system, while privately promoting secession and independence for East Bengal.
On the night of March 25, 1971, Yahya Khan launched a ferocious crackdown. The orgy of murder, rape and mayhem went on for months, focusing in genocidal fashion on the minority of Bengali Hindus regarded as most friendly to Pakistan’s enemy, India.
Nixon and Kissinger, his national security adviser, have sought to draw a curtain of silence over their role by omitting or glossing over the atrocities in their memoirs. Bass has defeated the attempted coverup through laborious culling of relevant sections of the Nixon White House tapes, declassified State Department documents and interviews with former officials, American and Indian, who were involved.
Archer Blood, the U.S. consul general in 1971 in Dhaka, the principal city of East Bengal, and his staff were horrified by the violence. Their reports to the State Department in Washington described the killings in gruesome detail and urged the strongest possible intervention to try to bring the carnage to an end. Pakistan’s generals were highly susceptible to pressure from Washington. Virtually their entire military, from the F-86 Sabre jet fighters in the air force to the armored, artillery and infantry contingents, was equipped with American weaponry and depended on the United States for the ammunition and spare parts required to keep it operating.
But the consulate’s cables met with what Blood later called a “deafening” silence from Washington. With the Bengalis being killed by American weapons wielded by an American-sponsored army, and Washington doing nothing to try to stop it, the United States had become complicit in the massacre.
In desperation, Blood’s younger staffers drew up a “dissent cable,” a Vietnam War-initiated reform in the Foreign Service meant to allow diplomats to speak out, confidentially but frankly, against official policy. Bass calls it “the Blood telegram” after its most important signatory — and as a double-entendre title for the events the book recounts. The cable accused the Nixon administration of “moral bankruptcy” and demanded action to stop the murders “in order to salvage our nation’s position as a moral leader of the free world.” Twenty members of the consulate staff signed the cable, a “roll call of honor,” as Blood put it. As the senior man, he had the most to lose by signing, and lose he did in the years to come.
What Blood and his young associates did not know was that Nixon and Kissinger were using Yahya Khan as a secret communications channel to Mao Zedong’s China. It was Yahya Khan who would arrange Kissinger’s clandestine trip to China in July 1971 to prepare the way for Nixon’s epochal visit there in February 1972. Nixon and Kissinger were determined to let nothing interfere with their enterprise to checkmate the Soviet Union in the Cold War by turning China into a friend of the United States. The cables from Blood’s consulate about this inconvenient massacre in East Bengal infuriated both men.
And there was more stroking their anger. They loathed India because the Indians had adopted a neutral position in the Cold War and then turned to the Soviet Union to obtain weapons, which they could not get from the United States, to fight Pakistan. To Nixon, the Indians were “a slippery, treacherous people.” To Kissinger — who comes across as a cold-blooded practitioner of realpolitik given to rages when he doesn’t get his way — the Indians were “insufferably arrogant,” with “convoluted minds.” At one point on the tapes, Nixon remarks, “The Indians need — what they really need is a” — Kissinger interjects, “They’re such bastards.” And then the president finishes his thought: “a mass famine.”
Nixon had a particular animus, a dislike that was mutual, toward Indira Gandhi, the prime minister and daughter of Jawaharlal Nehru, a founder of India and its first prime minister and greatest statesman.
Rather than seeking to restrain the Pakistani military, Nixon and Kissinger did all they could to strengthen it for the open clash with India that loomed because of the bloodshed in East Bengal. Once the fighting started, Bass recounts that, in a precursor to Watergate, the two men knowingly broke U.S. law by approving the transfer to Pakistan of American-supplied F-104 Starfighter jet interceptors from Jordan and Iran, then still under the rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. John Mitchell, Nixon’s attorney general and subsequently one of the major figures convicted in the Watergate scandal, was in the room at the time of the decision and made no objection. In the end, the Indian army decisively defeated the Pakistani forces, liberating East Bengal and fostering the birth of Bangladesh.
After reading Bass’s account of this shameful episode, one has to ask if preservation of the secret conduit to China via Pakistan was worth the lives of more than 200,000 Bengalis. Mao clearly wanted to do business with the United States, and some other channel presumably could have been found. One has to conclude that where the Bengalis were concerned, Kissinger and Nixon simply did not give a damn. And one has to wonder too, what had happened to the America that once stood for liberty, justice and decency.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...5130-1fc9-11e3-b7d1-7153ad47b549_story_1.html
