What's new

“Udhar tum, idhar hum”: When Bhutto pushed Bangladesh to the edge of Pakistan

Just glad Bangladesh is separate nation and not part of Pakistan. Would've been a huge burden on Pakistan's resources. What India has won is a millions of Bangladeshi migrants that have crowded their cities.If 71, would'nt have happened these huge slums would be all over Pakistan.

Malaysia in 1965, dismembered a control freak ruled Chinese majority Singapore and helped unify their nation. We should've also had the foresight to do the same. Good riddance
 
Hi,

there was NO REASON for the military to fight---. The cause was already lost when the public and politicians did not want to stay united---.

The military fell into the trap set by the politicians---.

When the public is against you---and you are a 1000 miles away from your base and supply line---what is the purpose of continuing the war---.
you are being soft on military. Although the late Indian General who led the invasion supports your point of view as well.

Politicians did what the Noonies today describe as "beauty of Democracy"

had Pak army dug its heals and blown up the bridges it would have stopped Indian advances instead of dashing to Dakha and and calling in general retreat and surrender.
. the rivers there are the size of a sea that cant be covered bridged through conventional military bridges. they would have delayed the fall to a point where UN would have intervened. (comments quoted from junior military officers who was serving during that time)

yes the cause was lost and politicians on both sides had lost sight of the united Pakistan ideology but military was the last line it has to take all the bitching and cynicism from PPP and Noon League
 
but the breakup was a military failure in the end.
Not at all, we can fight for many more months till U.N impose sanctions on India with the help of U.S and U.K but we have decided even before the war that we don't want loose part which constantly hanging over our neck.
 
This is just another excuse, Indian army acc. to Maneckshaw the indian army chief planned for 10 months before going in, and the Indian intelligence planned since 1962 when they met Sheikh Mujib what is called Agartala conspiracy. Indians realized the vaccuum left by Suhrwardy and Fazlul Haq deaths and acted accordingly. India actually wished the East Pakistani territory to remain with Pakistan and act as Indian proxy damaging our national interest and implode Pakistan from within.
 
you are being soft on military. Although the late Indian General who led the invasion supports your point of view as well.

Politicians did what the Noonies today describe as "beauty of Democracy"

had Pak army dug its heals and blown up the bridges it would have stopped Indian advances instead of dashing to Dakha and and calling in general retreat and surrender.
. the rivers there are the size of a sea that cant be covered bridged through conventional military bridges. they would have delayed the fall to a point where UN would have intervened. (comments quoted from junior military officers who was serving during that time)

yes the cause was lost and politicians on both sides had lost sight of the united Pakistan ideology but military was the last line it has to take all the bitching and cynicism from PPP and Noon League
The problem is the bad fortune never comes alone!!! It all rushes down like flood giving little time for maneuvering! Anyway, one Musibet is better than a thousand Nesihat...

The East Pak debacle had started even before the birth of Pak!!! 1971 was the climax. It's like the principal cause of divorce isn't the scuffle b/w the husband and the wife on the way to the Divorce Court....

Here are some points from this Fakir:
  • Geography is Fate/Destiny etc. (Ibn-i Haldun). And, we are the kids of the Time we live in. Both are against the concept of Pak as far as the BD/East Pak Muslim folks are concerned
  • The Permanent Settlement, under which 99% of the land belonged to the Hindu Landlords in the East Bengal, broke the mental faculties of the Muslims therein. They are dependent on Hindus for language, education, culture, thoughts, guidance, philosophy etc. According to the BD ruling party's former general secretary, Ashraful Islam, "We are neither Hindus nor Muslims"!! "What has Islam given to the world that it can offer something to BD?", BD's current finance minister Abdul Muhit!!! This is the essence of the BD elites
  • The folks from the East Pak coveted for all the good things the West Pak had, conveniently forgetting that they're getting much better materialistically compared to what they had under the Hindus
  • Fazlul Hak from Bengal was chosen by the Muslim leaders to table the Pakistan Proposal in Lahore. But he backed off few years later, at the insistence of the Hindus, causing Jinnah to utter, "Blood of Mir Jafar is flowing through his veins". So, the schism started even before the birth of Pak
  • Even in 1948 Jinnah understood that the East Pak folks, especially the educated ones, are the "friends of our enemies"
  • And, the rest is history....
 
Just glad Bangladesh is separate nation and not part of Pakistan. Would've been a huge burden on Pakistan's resources. What India has won is a millions of Bangladeshi migrants that have crowded their cities.If 71, would'nt have happened these huge slums would be all over Pakistan.

Malaysia in 1965, dismembered a control freak ruled Chinese majority Singapore and helped unify their nation. We should've also had the foresight to do the same. Good riddance
grapes are sour. there is no need to hate. what is done is done
a united Pakistan would have been much better had it been such a bad idea then it wouldnt have lasted up to 1971.

its tragic and a failure at many levels of our political and military leadership
India did what any hostile and opportunist enemy must do. it outplayed us on political, intelligence and military front and according to Indra drowned our ideology of 2 nation.

The problem is the bad fortune never comes alone!!! It all rushes down like flood giving little time for maneuvering! Anyway, one Musibet is better than a thousand Nesihat...

The East Pak debacle had started even before the birth of Pak!!! 1971 was the climax. It's like the principal cause of divorce isn't the scuffle b/w the husband and the wife on the way to the Divorce Court....

Here are some points from this Fakir:
  • Geography is Fate/Destiny etc. (Ibn-i Haldun). And, we are the kids of the Time we live in. Both are against the concept of Pak as far as the BD/East Pak Muslim folks are concerned
  • The Permanent Settlement, under which 99% of the land belonged to the Hindu Landlords in the East Bengal, broke the mental faculties of the Muslims therein. They are dependent on Hindus for language, education, culture, thoughts, guidance, philosophy etc. According to the BD ruling party's former general secretary, Ashraful Islam, "We are neither Hindus nor Muslims"!! "What has Islam given to the world that it can offer something to BD?", BD's current finance minister Abdul Muhit!!! This is the essence of the BD elites
  • The folks from the East Pak coveted for all the good things the West Pak had, conveniently forgetting that they're getting much better materialistically compared to what they had under the Hindus
  • Fazlul Hak from Bengal was chosen by the Muslim leaders to table the Pakistan Proposal in Lahore. But he backed off few years later, at the insistence of the Hindus, causing Jinnah to utter, "Blood of Mir Jafar is flowing through his veins". So, the schism started even before the birth of Pak
  • Even in 1948 Jinnah understood that the East Pak folks, especially the educated ones, are the "friends of our enemies"
  • And, the rest is history....

absolutely agree with you.re back to back misfortunes separated by thousand miles with a hostile enemy in the middle.

from hindsight it should have been 2 independent countries with independent parliaments , currencies governments and militaries united by a union for names sake with free movement like European union.
 
@Irfan Baloch

People like you are the reason Pakistan is behind, one needs to learn from their failures instead of lamenting them to demoralize, which is a kind of propaganda you are promoting. 71 was a forgotten chapter if not for people like you or Jang Group who posted annual mourning crap to promote Pakistan's enemies.
In 23 Mar. 1940 Lahore Resolution, it talked about states not one state for Mussalmans.
East Pakistan was an imposed territory by the British. British gave more literate Muslim majority Assam areas of Goalpara district to India and gave us this backward sh*thole upon which Pakistan wasted yearsw of planning commission money. We should've altealst treated the way Banglas accuse us of and I mean like the Burmese and Indians. No bank accounts, no passports, no education, no military recruitment, no progress, only restrict them to jute and traditional fishing, seal the border with no access to India the way it happenedin 80s. There would be no Bangladesh.
 
@Irfan Baloch

People like you are the reason Pakistan is behind,

behind what? how am I among those holding the like of you back.
holding you back from what?

one needs to learn from their failures

exactly, and to do that you don't apologize. you got to be brutally honest about every aspect that went wrong no matter how much it hurts. so that you dont repeat the same mistake.
this bit, I call Point Alpha remember that because I will refer you back to it

instead of lamenting them to demoralize, which is a kind of propaganda you are promoting.

come again? propaganda what? lamenting what. "them" who? demoralize what?
death of grammar? discontinuity of thought? please cool down and rephrase what you mean
71 was a forgotten chapter if not for people like you or Jang Group who posted annual mourning crap to promote Pakistan's enemies.
Ok listen.

I will break it down for you in case there is comprehension problem and we don't get ahead of ourselves

71 will never be a forgotten chapter. our country was gutted. our dream was lost. we failed to protect our country our enemy succeeded and this will never be forgotten. why? as per your own point that we dont repeat the same mistakes.

mourning the loss is a natural behavior like celebrating an achievement. you cant suppress it. you do it independent of what the enemy thinks or say. you dont promote Pakistan enemies if you remember (with sadness) what led to chain of events leading to the surrender signature in the Pultan ground.
painful as it looks, there is a lesson for current and future generation to watch out for overt and covert enemies and defeat them in their game.
disclaimer, I have no affiliation with Jang group and I don't follow or support their editorial agenda.


recall point Alpha
you just contradicted your statement "one needs to learn from their failures"
In 23 Mar. 1940 Lahore Resolution, it talked about states not one state for Mussalmans.
East Pakistan was an imposed territory by the British. British gave more literate Muslim majority Assam areas of Goalpara district to India and gave us this backward sh*thole upon which Pakistan wasted yearsw of planning commission money.
very unfortunate and crude choice of words. we were in no shape to dictate our terms our founding fathers took what we got and vowed to build a nation on it.
We should've altealst treated the way Banglas accuse us of and I mean like the Burmese and Indians. No bank accounts, no passports, no education, no military recruitment, no progress, only restrict them to jute and traditional fishing, seal the border with no access to India the way it happenedin 80s. There would be no Bangladesh.
totally uncalled for comment and absolute rant.
please refrain from insulting a race of a country. its against forum rules
 
The fall of Dhaka is one of those events in our history that we’d rather forget. No one talks about it nowadays, because it was the result of our own follies. But those who are still alive will never be able to forget TV newscaster Shaista Jabeen’s tearful announcement that dreadful night in December:

“According to an agreement, Indian soldiers have now taken control of Dhaka.”

The people in what remained of Pakistan were shocked beyond belief. For days they had been told that everything was normal in the eastern wing, despite the BBC giving a contrasting picture. As always, the reaction from those who mattered was that BBC was an Indian agent, presenting a false image of the situation. No wonder violent protesters came out on the streets and burned down then president Yahya Khan’s house in Peshawar after feeling betrayed due to the surrender.

Most of the Pakistanis who were born after 1965 probably don’t know that our country had a province called East Pakistan, where the Pakistan movement started with the birth of the Muslim League in 1905. The people of that province were as good of Pakistanis as we in West Pakistan were, yet to our eternal shame, they were denied what was rightfully theirs. We made fun of them, of the way they spoke, of their language and attire. Most of the income for Pakistan was contributed from East Pakistan; however, the money was spent to develop West Pakistan. Despite all of this discrimination, we were surprisingly astounded when we found out they didn’t want to remain a part of Pakistan. To be honest, the only surprising thing in this should be that Pakistan was even able to remain united for 25 years before being dismembered.

There are many versions of why we lost East Pakistan, depending on who you ask. However, one thing is for sure: it didn’t happen overnight. It took many years for the people of East Pakistan to decide that there was no future for them in a united Pakistan.

Perhaps it all began when Muhammad Ali Jinnah, despite the hostility of the students of Dhaka University he was addressing, insisted that “Urdu and only Urdu” would be the state language of Pakistan. This was strange, since the Quaid himself could only speak broken Urdu and that too with great difficulty. I strongly suspect Jinnah wanted Urdu as the national language because he was under pressure from the feudal lords of West Pakistan to do so. The only other reason would be that he did not know that the vast majority of people in East Pakistan didn’t speak Urdu or even understood it, which seems highly unlikely.

Thus began the process of poisoning relations between the two parts of the country. The Bengali speakers launched a movement to have their language recognised as the state language along with Urdu. After many deaths, they succeeded to have their demand accepted in 1956.

But the rot had begun.

It didn’t help that the country had no constitution before 1956. By a peculiar twist of logic, despite East Pakistanis comprising the majority (56%), they were allowed to have the same number of seats in the assembly as the people of West Pakistan. The first martial law in 1958 (which was imposed by a general belonging to West Pakistan) together with the fact that East Pakistanis were not as many in number in the central government and the services increased their feeling of isolation. When it was time for Ayub Khan to resign, the Constitution required that he should hand over power to the speaker of the National Assembly (Abdul Jabbar Khan, a Bengali). However, Ayub did not do so and instead asked the then Army Chief (Yahya Khan) to take over the reins of the country. This further alienated the people of East Pakistan, adding to their bitterness of being neglected.

Pakistan could have remained united if its rulers had accepted Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the prime minister, which was his legal right as his party had won the 1970 Elections. Despite this, Zuilfiqar Ali Bhutto, whose party had won in Punjab and Sindh, did not agree to recognise Rahman as the prime minister of the country. He also steadfastly refused to attend the National Assembly session which was to be held in Dhaka. In fact, he was so arrogant that he threatened to break the legs of his elected party members if they dared to go to Dhaka. He knew that he could never be the prime minister of a united Pakistan, so he even said,

Udhar tum, idhar hum.


(You rule in the East, we will rule in the West)

Bhutto claimed that Rahman’s demands for maximum autonomy, called the Six Points, would weaken the country. When president Yahya called Rahman the future prime minister of the country, Bhutto was incensed. He questioned how a man who was considered to be a traitor recently was now being touted as the prime minister.

Despite his claims, there are indications that Rahman did not want the breakup the country. After his release from jail in 1969, he said,

“We are in the majority, why should we secede?”

According to Dr Moonis Ahmer, Rahman asked the military authorities twice in March 1971 to protect him from the diehard members of his party as they wanted him to declare independence.

As for the 1971 war, our brave soldiers could have defended Dhaka for more than three months, if the government had stationed more troops in that city. But the army was spread out throughout the province, and despite having enough ammunition and weapons to last them for many months, there was no option but to surrender.

Again, we lost the opportunity to save the country when Bhutto reportedly went to the United Nations but deliberately confined himself to his hotel room for two days (it is widely believed that he did this to allow the Indian army to have more time to reach the gates of Dhaka). If he had really wanted to save Pakistan, he would not have dilly-dallied, but would have accepted the Polish Resolution calling for a ceasefire (instead, he tore it up and walked away).

From the looks of it, Bhutto was mainly responsible for the great tragedy. In fact, when you think of it, all the problems we face today are a direct result of what he said and did after the 1970 Elections and after he assumed charge of the country in 1971. He said that he would build a new Pakistan from the ruins of the old one but instead caused immense damage to the country. But that is a story for another time.

https://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/...n-bhutto-divided-pakistan-into-east-and-west/
If it was this then why did you all call Punjabi's the one who led you to break apart.
When ever something happen Punjabi's were blamed, why?
 
Exactly, bangladesh was a huge burden since day one. They were the one playing in the hands of pakistan s enemies. They were the ones who were opportunists and jumped in our bandwagon cuz they knew independence of Bangladesh was not possible without west Pakistan.
No, western Pakistan was an economic burden to eastern Pakistan. Read the article thoroughly and try to understand it and do not keep on talking on false premises. Your kind of people will only be biting your fingers with the loss of eastern wing but it was caused by your own leaders.

Bhutto was too busy to promote himself up. He destroyed Ayub Khan's rule by a continuous street agitation although this greedy was the FM in his time. He was not willing to accept any other post in 1971 except the Prime Ministership of Pakistan even it meant to divide Pakistan into five. He was much worse than today's Hasina of Bangladesh.
 
No one talks of Bengali traitors who sucked the blood out our nation's veins yet had the gall to point fingers at us.

Bengali politicians were single handily responsible for denying the country a stable constitution for 23 years!

Pakistan has only become more powerful, more prosperous and more united and sovereign since while Bangladesh is little more than an Indian satellite state.
So such comment now from an administrator of this forum? It's truly unexpected and disastrous !
If administrators will speak like this then it's no wonder some common haters write hateful posts.

I am wondering what will be the comment of @Slav Defence on this post of @Horus .

It's a clear offense against the whole nation by not only calling them traitor, but calling them an Indian satellite state. And for such offence ( that was the reason of a vicious flame argument) another common user was banned.
Common users abuse peoples , and moderators and administrators impose rules and judge according to forum law and protect victims.

But when protector become offender , then perhaps the message is clear.

Is forum law same for everyone ? Maybe or maybe not!

But clearly it's not the way to move on forward ,but it's the way to keep alive the bitterness of past between the two nations .
Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Honestly....Pakistan with west and east one prior to BD creation would be a nightmare for Pakistan....At that point of time...it was pakistan's interest to have a good relation with India to keep BD's independent movement in control...So the history of subcontinent will be different...

Pakistan leaders definitely lacked long term vision when BD movement was happening....How can you think of managing a nation separates by thousand miles....And again...you will not have good relation with the coyntry which in between w parts of Pakistan..
 
but the breakup was a military failure in the end.

granted, India played very well and sowed the seeds ahead in time right after 1965 and its role with Makti Bahami and west Pakistanis continued to discriminate East Pakistan or failed to address the East Pakistani issues

Bhutto did what any opportunist would have done. self service, **** the country , it was the call of the president to accommodate Mujeeb or not (although Mujeeb was already on the same page with the Indians)

Bhutto ripped off the Polish resolution yes but again. it was the call of the Pakistani military leadership to continue to retreat faster than Indian advances and then surrender. a lot of could have should have would have.

what is done is done. Bangladesh is an independent , strong and prosperous country and we wish it well.

I don't think so. It was a political failure. If you look at Mujib's political history, he was a loyal Pakistani right up to early 1971, and even until Operation Searchlight, from his written and spoken words, he might have been open to reconciliation.

You are precisely right in saying that "...it was the call of the president to accommodate Mujeeb or not". That was the crucial decision, the deal breaker.

You are precisely wrong in saying the next, in saying that "... Mujeeb was already on the same page with the Indians".

Please think this through for a few moments, for more than a fraction of the time that it takes to read that sentence. Imagine a Pakistan administration that was friendly with India, an India that was getting itself together under Indira Gandhi, who really was not bothered with what Pakistan was or was not doing. She knew Bhutto and had known him for years, she knew Bhutto's track record, and she was shrewd enough and suspicious enough to keep an eye on him. RAW was just being put together. the ISI had been formed years earlier and was actively encouraging dissent in India from its base in East Pakistan, specifically in the north-east. Now suppose this concealed hostility was genuine neutrality, under a Bengali politician. Would that have destroyed the world?

Please also remember that in 1947, Suhrawardy, on the one hand, and Sarat Bose, Netaji's brother, and Kiron Shankar Roy, a prominent East Bengali Congress politician, were agreed on a third Dominion, separate from India and from Pakistan. An annoyed and frustrated Jinnah said, more or less, do whatever you please, and the deal was through, except for the alarmed Hindu leaders in Calcutta and in west Bengal. They had Bose and Roy summoned to Delhi and hectored by Nehru and Patel, and this initiative just petered out.

The roots of Bengali separatism, both east and west Bengali separatism, had been there from before Independence.

I wish Pakistani members of this forum would think once in a while about the possibility that Pakistan unilaterally thought of peaceful co-existence with India. When there were ample opportunities for that, they spurned it. Both countries suffer today, and will continue to suffer in future because of this. I have already pointed out that Indira Gandhi was not at all interested in pursuing a hostile policy towards Pakistan until Fate, assisted by the coterie around Yahya, dumped a refugee problem on her doorstep. Please don't forget that she was thereafter under tremendous pressure from her own province of West Bengal to do 'something', anything to stop the agony.

I had read a book on this in the Uni library but perhaps @Joe Shearer can shed more light.

Even though East Pakistan had a larger population, West Pakistan had a larger Muslim population. That's what riled West Pakistanis that the difference which gave a population edge to East Pakistan was Hindu citizens of East Pakistan.

Most refugees which poured into India (videos of Foreign networks are available on YouTube) were Hindus. India down played their religious identity for fear of Hindu Muslim riots in other parts of India.

There was also something about a Cyclone just prior to the War which left East Pakistan devastated and the purse strings were controlled by West Pakistan which wasn't too generous. From what I understand that was the final straw which broke the camel's back.

I won't comment on your opening lines, because I feel too lazy to look up the Muslim population, in 1970, of West Pakistan only, that of East Pakistan, and the Hindu population of the two provinces respectively, to demonstrate to other members what you mean. Already, @PakSarzameen5823 has misunderstood what you are trying to say.

As for the rest, it is futile to comment. It is saddening to see a live demonstration that not very many people are able to see, far less willing to admit, that genuine opportunities for peace were given short shrift.
 
Back
Top Bottom