Thread: Pakistani Genocide

Originally Posted by Khalsa_starr

Thos picture are horrible! There are genocided happening all over the world, but people usualy say they are just uprisings and so forth...

People killed in cross firing or by mistake are different matters. This was genocide. Similar to what was done to the hindus/Sikhs in 1947, in west Punjab and Kashmir.

The mass graves in Kolaroa, Bangladesh.

Mass-graves were found in Kolaroa upazialla (sub-district):
1. Kolaroa Pilot School ground
2. Balpara (Sripatipur)
3. Baliadanga
4. Bamnakhali
5. Bhadiali
6. Goira
7.Sonabaria
8.Hindupara (Sonabaria)
9. Jamtola (Sharsha PS)

Genocide in East Pakistan (Bangladesh)

An interesting article by I think a Bangladeshi :

"Pakistani-Islam's Global Ploy and Suppression of Bengali Genocide Tragedy"
by Jamal Hasan

The year 1971 was indeed a time of a catastrophic tragedy of disproportionate magnitude in the South Asian region. It also inculcated a serious message on the belief system on a number of God-fearing Bengalis. The cruelty inflicted on a hapless population was so immense that many of the traditional believers became disillusioned with the religion of Islam, totally. A few of them even went to the extent of going on a missionary zeal of being vocal critics of Islam. Conversely, the defenders of Islam who did not side with the brutal regime would endlessly argue the position of the neo-attackers of Islam. They would say, "Look what the Pakistanis did was not manifestation of true Islam. The Pakistani marauding soldiers even killed namazis in mosques all across occupied Bangladesh ."

When excesses are done in the name of religion, the people in the receivers' end often become disenchanted rather quickly. Iran could be a case in point. Many of the urban intelligentsia now comment that even in Shah's time people used to respect Islam. Now the mullahs made the religion very much an oppressive tool. No wonder, more and more people are losing respect for Islam in the country of Islamic Shangri-La.

If we go back to 1971 once again and try to extrapolate the lifestyle of average Pakistani army man in the occupied Bangladesh , we may bring one possible scenario. As the soldiers plundered, looted and raped the masses, they suddenly did not become atheists or agnostics. Most of them were God-fearing Muslims. The keepers of the Razarbagh Police Line prison, where dozens of Bengali women were raped and assaulted on a daily basis, were in all likelihood practicing Muslims. Maybe, many of them did not miss the daily prayers. Or, how about the caretakers of those bunkers near the Tripura border and elsewhere in the erstwhile East Pakistan where unclothed and visibly shaken Bengali women were rescued immediately after liberation of the country? Maybe, during the month of Ramadan many of the rapists and assaulters fasted following the dictum of the Divine religion. The question is, why didn't the barbaric oppression not subdue because of the religious teaching? Is it because somehow the brutal forces could rationalize all the misdeeds keeping the broader guideline of scripture? Did they believe by heart whatever brutality they were committing was not against the spirit of Islamic ideal?

The critics of Islam would say that the problem of such barbarism lies in the inherently ambiguous scriptural texts of the religion. Defenders of faith sympathizing with Bengali cause may argue that all the brutality was perpetrated with a facade of a skewed interpretation resulting in misinterpretation of the scripture. I do not want to join the debate as I lack enough expertise on the intricacy of Islamic theology. I can only attempt to put the political agenda of the Pakistani brand of Islam in proper perspective as it relates to the events of 1971. As before, I am calling the manifestation of Islam a tool for oppression in occupied Bangladesh as Pakistani-Islam. I am not blaming Islam, per se, for the catastrophe. I would rather accuse the Pakistani oligarchy for smoothly pocketing a century-old religion to serve the narrow interest and racist agenda of the Punjabi ruling clique.

Almost all the Islamist parties in the Pakistan occupied Bangladesh sided with the oppressive military regime of Yahya Khan in 1971. Immediately after liberation, quite a few of the social outcasts experienced backlash from the victims -- the Bengali masses. Under such an unfavorable situation of post independent Bangladesh , the killer and collaborator mullahs went into hiding until the reformed Islam pasand dictator Ziaur Rahman became victorious in the political arena. During much of Zia and the other military ruler Ershad era, the hibernating killers and collaborators of the Pakistani-Islamic sector got a new lease of life. The paradigm was calculatively shifted by the conniving Bengali generals favoring Yahya Khan's position of 1971. In this backdrop, the heinous Islamist criminals of 1971 could, without much effort, recapture significant Islamic landmarks like Bait-ul Mukarram and the other leading mosques. The situation became so frustrating that many of the Bengali nationalists who were also believers in Islam had no option but to boycott the places of worship that put killers of 1971 in a clergy's role. The leading Bengali poetess Sufia Kamal's death bed wish was no Jamaati or a killer mullah would be allowed to do the needful during her funeral rites.

Turning back to Pakistani army juntas, let me reiterate that they used and abused the religion of Islam to serve their purposes. They were quite aware of the ground reality that their colonial interest could only be attained if they skillfully played the Islamic card. In fact, they succeeded to a great length not only yesterday, but also today. Islam's critics saw the ruthless Yahya army indiscriminately killed civilians, and religious minority in particular. From the night of 25th March there was a selective massacre in Hindu populated areas where even the little children were not spared. The critics of Islam would find a pattern of intolerance to non-believer from the dawn of Islamic civilization that goes contrary to humanistic ideals. According to their view, the concept of Jihad and killing of infidels mercilessly was nothing new in the history of Islamic civilization. And their view was reinforced as the great majority of the Muslim nations nakedly sided with the marauding Pakistani junta of 1971.

The terms like Umma or Islamic brotherhoods are uniquely common in the faith of Islam. These terms are definitely political. In other words, the politicized terminologies could wake some faithful who are half asleep. Unfortunately, the merchants of religion, the Pakistani oligarchy, till today are bent on using those words to subjugate the less viable populations of Sindh, NWFP or Balochistan. Whenever a minority ethnic group demands its right, the usual outcry in Islamabad would be, "Islam in danger!" The irony of the matter is Yahya's troop in 1971 did so much harm and long term damage to Islam that it won't be too easy to salvage. When a crime against humanity is committed in the name of religion, the incriminating evidence can hardly be hidden from the watchful eyes of the conscientious international community.

As the days go by, we are confronting with the sad past and are unearthing and documenting gory details of the monstrosity of those Muslims from a western land called Pakistan . Consider the most recent documentation of demolition of the Ramna Racecourse Hindu Temple call Kali BaDi. According to an eyewitness account the following chilling moments occurred in that historical big field located in the close proximity of the Dhaka University . On the fateful night of March 25, 1971, when the Pakistani soldiers cordoned off the area, they gathered a number of Hindu men, women and children from the vicinity. Before getting shot at, the high priest of the age-old temple was compelled to recite some Qura'nic verses. The men and children were put on the firing line and the women's lives were spared as they were whisked away to an unknown destination. These sorts of dark chapters gave the requisite ammo to the anti-Islamic crusaders to transpose their point of view. They have the opportunity to equate these grotesque situations with the snatching of the so-called war booties (captured women and children) from the defeating forces of the Pagan Arabs or the Quryash tribe in the late 7th century that had legitimization as per Islamic doctrine.

These days many Bengalis outside Bangladesh attempt to reinvent their identity. A good number of them try to become neo-Muslims. I have no qualm with it if it only confines to individual relationship to the divinity. But the problem arises when Pakistani-Islam comes into play. Unfortunately, in regard to 1971 episode, many Bengalis fall into the trap of selective amnesia, which is quite detestable. To them, loving Islam means loving the marauding Pakistani army of 1971. Ultimately, the crime and rape committed by those hordes become less condemnable. That is the winning situation for the Pakistani ruling elite. They successfully injected the opium of Pakistani-Islam into the veins of the Bengalis for 24 years, which did not go away with a tragedy of nine months. If the Pakistani soldiers were Hindus, Jewish or of Christian faith, we may witness those God-fearing Bengalis would never forget the crime inflicted on their own brothers or sisters. Probably those Islamist Bengalis would have been the greatest crusaders to rekindle the spirit of 1971, if the scenario was such. After all, in a politicized religious world, it is always an issue of us versus them.

Lest we forget, in the theological realm, Christianity got serious setback from within by the Protestant movement of yesteryear. After 1971, the Bengalis had a real chance to confront the world body of Islamic nations to extract a justifiable explanation for its overt antipathy toward Bengalis' struggle for national emancipation. Did the Bengalis utilize the opportune moment? Not at all. To add insults to the injury, the founding father of the emerging nation went to the Islamic summit in Lahore that was tantamount to kowtowing the Pakistani regime that could consequently legitimize the role of Pakistani-Islam in 1971. After that melodrama, as the Bengali leader went to the Saudi Arabia begging for
the nascent republic's recognition from the medieval sheikdom, he got a real taste of the Pakistani-Islam's over encompassing tentacle. The Saudi leader categorically said that he was in great pain to see the casualty of Pakistani Muslim soldiers in East Pakistan . Readers may now see that although the Pakistani soldiers raped and destroyed a peace-loving population, they were still perceived as the Saudi kingdom's brothers. That means even if half of the Bengali population were wiped out and all the Bengali women were raped by the "brotherly Pakistani army," it would not bring any second thought among the Saudi royalty. What a disgrace!

Turning my eyes to modern day America to look at how my Bengali compatriots faring with other Muslim Ummats I get the chill of my life. Here, quite a few expatriates Bengali Muslims endeavored to enhance their Muslim identity by joining such groups like Islamic Society of North America, Islamic Circle of North America , American Muslim Council or the Council on American-Islamic Relations. The groups are supposed to help the minority Muslim cause in a predominantly non-Muslim country like USA (or Canada ). Pakistan traditionally has been a good patron for such groups. As a new member of the nuclear club Pakistan 's influence and prestige have quadrupled in the comity of Islamic nations. They are the proverbial Big brother now. The ruling elite of Pakistan already have become a behind-the-scene agenda setter of many Islamic groups in non-Islamic countries. Not only that, a fundamentalist
party like Jamat-i-Islami has exerted considerable influence on a group like Islamic Circle of North America . One of this group's leaders is an alleged notorious war criminal who was accused of killing seven university teachers in Bangladesh in 1971. Any new member of either of the above-mentioned groups may come across political discourse on the misery and sufferings of a number of nationalities of Muslim faith. The plight of the Chechens, Kashmiris, Kosovars or Bosnians may inundate the web pages of such groups. Bangladesh genocide is history now. But do you think there is any room for the great human tragedy in the charters of those groups? Readers, please do not delude yourselves. These highly politicized groups are mouthpieces of quite a few vested interests and Pakistani oligarchy is one of them. If anything mentioned in any of the group's working paper regarding Bangladesh genocide that would be something like this, "In 1971 India attacked Pakistan and Pakistani soldiers fought against the attackers and ultimately India succeeded in splitting up the Islamic nation of Pakistan with the help of miscreants belonging to Awami League." Probably Bengali Muslim faithfuls who became part and parcel of the Pakistani-Islamic agenda do not care much when the question of their Pakistani brothers' crime against humanity is raised. And that attitude is definitely a great hindrance to upholding a nation's dignity. We should be reminded of this sad reality one more time.

Guys just see what a rich diet of madrassa logic are ppl from pureland have been fed.
Very interesting article.

http://www.defencejournal.com/2000/oct/hamoodur.htm

Hamoodur Rahman Commission report surfaces again

Columnist MB NAQVI talks about the famous Report.

Every now and then something about this report crops up in the press and a lot of brouhaha is made by those who want it to be published pronto and those who want to keep it a dead secret. Parts of the report have been published several times in foreign press. But the full report has not been published verbatim and there is no certainty that some doctoring has not been done by either those who leaked it or by others who might have been instrumental in some way in the act of its publishing. The liberal opinion within the country is unanimous that the report should at least now see the light of the day after 30 years of the events it investigated. There are elements in the armed forces and some parts of the government that think that its publication would harm the national interests. Which national interests would they be, after 30 years of the 1971 war?

It is said that the image of the army would be adversely affected —-where is not quite clear. Insofar as the rest of the world is concerned, their opinion on Pakistan’s armed forces would be based on their national experts’ assessments of their conduct during the 53 years of Pakistan’s history. Presumably the worry is about the opinion within the country. Insofar as the principles of good governance are concerned, there is absolutely no case to keep the report unpublished. There have been reports that most copies of the report were destroyed in 1977, if not earlier. But that seems to be rather unlikely. The government and the armed forces would certainly have in their secret archives several copies of the full report. Doubtless, Pakistan has had an unenviable record of governance and in any case it is a truly underdeveloped country. Even so it would be passing strange if the state is being run in a fashion in which such an important document dealing with truly sensitive matters at that time could have been really destroyed. That would presuppose that Pakistanis were living in the days before the nation state was invented. No, it seems unlikely that this could have happened even in Pakistan. However, the question of image of the armed forces needs to be looked into.

The hard fact is that there was an East Pakistan Crisis. There were disturbances from about end of February to early March in 1971 as a result of which Sahibzada Yaqub Khan resigned his command having developed differences with the GHQ over the hawkish approach favoured by the latter. Later Governor Admiral S.M. Ahsan also resigned as the Governor for exactly the same reason. It is a fact that GHQ was dominated by hawks vis-a-vis East Pakistan and their response to the speeches of Shaikh Mujibur Rahman on March 7 and 15, 1971 as also the orientation of his leadership was displayed in the military crackdown late on March 25 with indiscriminate shooting from guns, large and small. It is also a fact that the targets were Bengalis in general and those who were shooting were soldiers of Pakistan’s armed forces, West Pakistanis, mostly Punjabis. The political consequences of that action included a virtual rebellion by Bengalis within the armed forces (inside East Pakistan) and there was the general air of ‘us’ and ‘they’.

At length a lot of young Bengalis went underground and organised Mukti Bahini with the support of India. India encouraged them and armed them. Later the Indians took the matters in their own hands and invaded East Pakistan. The Pakistan armed forces could fight barely for two weeks and surrendered. The ignominy of this resistance was shown by the fact that while the garrison that surrendered in Dhaka comprised 25 thousand troops. The Indian column that occupied Dhaka had only 5 thousand troops on December 16.

There is no doubt about the fact —- and it has been admitted by Governor Gen. Tikka Khan that the reported figures are gross exaggeration —- that there were random killings, rapes and other atrocities by the West Pakistani troops, not excluding senior officers. The effects of the surrender is now history as also the conduct of the armed forces during those critical nine months. The whole world regarded and called Pakistanis as ‘yahoos’. The Indians and the western press had gone to town on Pakistan; in world media the name of Pakistan was mud. That whole world believed that Pakistani troops have committed all those atrocities that were freely reported, though mostly on the basis of exaggerated refugees’ tales. The news management by the military in East Pakistan ensured that the worst was believed abroad; all supporters of Bengalis were given a bonanza by preventing accurate reporting from East Pakistan. Insofar as the rest of the world is concerned, the maximum damage to image of Pakistan’s armed forces did take place and its effects have not entirely been wiped out by subsequent conduct of the armed forces in Pakistan politics.

The fact is that only West Pakistani people were denied any access to accurate information of what was going on in East Pakistan remains to be assessed. Maybe that if the nature of the conduct by troops and officers in East Pakistan had been more or less correctly reflected in the press and media of West Pakistan, it is possible that the image of the forces might have been tarnished. But this would only be a minority opinion. No one can say that West Pakistanis did not hear, from the word of mouth and through the radio broadcast, by all India Radio, BBC, Voice of America, German radio and many others. The fact of the matter is that most of the West Pakistani people, certainly the majority of the people of Punjab, approved or appeared to approve —- they certainly showed no clear distaste or disapproval —- of whatever Pakistan armed forces were doing in East Pakistan.

The crackdown on Dhaka was hailed by Mr. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto with the telltale remark: “Pakistan has been saved”. Everybody knew that West Pakistani opinion was being reflected by Mr. Bhutto and his party that had not put up one single candidate in East Pakistan in the first ever December 1970 polls. No doubt that there were dissenting opinions in West Pakistan. But such voices were few and far between and carried little weight with the powers that be; the National Awami Party led by Wali Khan in West Pakistan, GM Syed and various other Pukhtoon nationalist groups were unanimous in favour of convening the Constituent Assembly as it had emerged on December 8, 1970 and to hand over Pakistan’s administration to the Leader of the House who might be elected in it. Not so, the leader of the PPP that commanded 88 seats in a house of 313 but who aspirated the opinions mainly of the Punjabi voters which, importantly, reflected also the view of the ruling establishment. PPP was certainly opposed to most ideas of Awami League and Shaikh Mujibur Rahman. No one can doubt the full support of PPP for the military action of Gen. Yahya Khan on that March 25 and in subsequent months. That Bhutto developed his own complaints against Yahya Khan is a separate and a later story. Yahya Khan for all his dictatorial status, his actions were commonly accepted and supported in West Pakistan. The regime did not encounter much resistance right down to the period leading up to the war. It was only after the disastrous results of the war were known that some people protested. For the rest, West Pakistan, by and large, supported Yahya Khan and his military action.

The question of the image of armed forces within West Pakistan is a question on which no easy or firm statement can be made. A great deal of West Pakistani opinion would probably still have approved of whatever the armed forces were doing even if all the fact had been fully reported. Somehow the opinion makers in West Pakistan, chiefly represented by Urdu newspapers, were clearly hostile to all the Bengali aspirations. They pooh poohed the Bengali grievances. What however remains true is that the influence of the people who were actually opposed to the whole East Pakistan policy of Gen. Yahya Khan and his Junta was negligible. It is questionable whether there would have been a great uproar or great revulsion against the armed forces if the reports of what they were doing were published in full. If the foregoing assessments of the 1971 situation is correct, a clear light is thrown on the question.

Well, East Pakistan Crisis was not the only incident in Pakistan’s history for which the armed forces might be on the defensive. Various inquiries have been conducted in this country and the reports have stayed secret. The process began with Liaquat Ali Khan’s assassination in 1951. No authoritative enquiry report has been published, not even by foreign experts. Indeed, there was a curious Pak Air crash in which some of the original investigators, and supposedly with all the files, perished. There were various other inquiries about mutinies, Ojhri camp fire, that have never seen the light of the day. Not even the Narayanganj riots report has been published. There has been a pervasive culture of secrecy in this country. The governments somehow wish to hide the truth. Preference for secrecy is only one side of the coin, the other side is the distrust of the people. It is a moot point whether an image of the armed forces that requires so much secrecy and running away from facts can really be helpful to the armed forces. On the contrary, it would appear that the armed forces are being badly advised to go on insisting on total secrecy over facts that are known throughout the world. There is the general dictum that all civilisations have believed in: truth and the whole truth cannot really hurt. If an image can be hurt by truth, then it is surely not worth preserving. In any case, it is not likely to survive.

The Armed Forces and the rest of those who politically support them will be judged by the people as well as history on the basis of their conduct. Hiding uncomfortable reports do not change the course of history. On a longer view of things, the armed forces are being hurt more by secrecy than if all the facts had been known. What really is the image of the armed forces in the country today? This has to be sharply distinguished from the image of any particular set of senior officers in the eyes of their own troops is a wholly different kettle of fish. One is not concerned with the latter, though many army leaders might be. In the overall context of the country, this can easily be ignored; it is relevant only inside the army, not even in the other services. Today, whether or not Pakistanis know all the fact or what is shown as wrong in the Hamoodur Rahman Commission report or other reports, there are now two clear schools of opinion with reference to 1971 events: a lot of people, it may still be a majority, approved the armed forces actions in general (while deprecating individuals’ conduct), while the other holds them culpable. This is a fact of life and should be faced by all.

Moreover the image of the armed forces can only be based on what the people see and note about them in peace and their conduct in war. Pakistan’s armed forces have been a decisive part of Pakistan’s politics. There have been four clear military takeovers. Nearly half the life of Pakistan has been spent under military rules. There were three occasions when armed forces were used to quell what were thought to be disturbances: in 1953 in Punjab, in 1964 and 1977 in Balochistan. Here the Operation Closed Door in East Pakistan of 1950s can be ignored, though it was a fairly big operation. Then there have been reports of conspiracies within the army beginning in 1950-51, twice in early 1970s and once in 1990s. It is the overall picture in the mind of the common Pakistanis that goes into making of all an overall image. Here again, as in the case of 1971 events, the majority opinion still is strongly pro-armed forces. But it is only the majority. The nation should not run away from facts under imaginary fears of a minority.

There has been a lot of nonsense uttered in this country about the imagmanship. Far too many people with media background have made their careers on the plea that they understand the intricacies of image making. One has no desire to hurt the chances of slick people trying to improve their own fortunes by advising on the question of improving the image of this, that and other thing, including governments. The armed forces have of course their own department to look after their image. They should not need outside advisors who themselves would be well advised to leave the armed forces alone. They can manage their own image better. Finally, a simple statement can be made: Is it or is it not a fact that the image must have some relationship with facts. Can anyone keep an image burnished, if facts do not support it?

Yes, yes, the usual drivel. DO THE MATH FOR YOURSELF. 3 million people killed by th West Pakistan Army in 9 months. Shouldnt that be a record in itself? I should write to the Guiness Book of Records. I might get my name put in. Dammit, I found someone who's already tried that and been rejected (letters below).

The reply form GB (letter no. 4. Date 22nd Feb 1990) was very disappointing. The GB refused to recognize the War of Independence as constituting a record of the highest rate of deaths (per day) since 1945. The GB had also mysteriously made no mention of my own little evidence. Therefore the doubt still persisted about the validity of the THREE MILLION. And since the casualties of the war did not amount to a record, the question remained as to how many really died during the War of Independence.

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman has used the number THREE MILLION on occasions in the first month of his victorious arrival from Pakistan In total, from 1972 to 1975 he used this controversial number on a dozen occasion. The THREE MILLION is mentioned in some patriotic songs and poems.
http://www.engr.uconn.edu/~faisal/Genocide.html

Oh yes, i can just see this guy is very impartial

As it can be seen from the letter numbered I (date I, December 1988), The GB took my first letter very seriously by terming the War as an “Omission” in their book I was getting very excited. In their next letter numbered 2 (date 5th January 1989) the GB wanted to know “precisely” what my source of information was. My excitement soared to the extent that I started dreaming about becoming a national figure. I was about to prove THREE MILLION to the world-a feat that no Bangladeshi could do before.
http://www.engr.uconn.edu/~faisal/Genocide.html

Talking to people on Bangladesh, 1971 gets very very circular after a bit. It boils down to this. There is no evidence of mass genoicide or mass rapings, though I have no doubt some war crimes were committed, since they happen in any war, especially if discipline breaks down in the ranks or you have some undisciplined soldiers. This is not at all uncommon. You will find every single war has had breaks of the Geneva Conventions. It's as much to do with training a soldier to kill and manipulate their minds if need be so that they're filled with hatred for their enemy that will cause some to act out like that.

Having said all that. One picture of a West Pakistani Army soldier checking some guys dik for circumcision is hardly evidence of mass selective targeting of Hindus, is it?

That soldier looks pretty Bengali to me, and it's you guys who say the West Pakistani are tall and fair, the Bengalis are short and dark, your words, not mine.

Yes, yes, you've also shown a picture of small slaughtered people. That would not be difficult to find even in todays South Asia, even in Kashmir.

Oh, and then there's pictures of dead bodies who people claim they're all Hindu, as if that's a creditable source. Dont suppose the person who sold the pictures thought he could get more money by trumpeting forth a Hindu genocide? How did he know they were Hindu?

Yes yes, then there's RJ Rummel's "calculation". Hardly based on fact, just newspaper reports, majority of then Indian and Bengali.

Then there's all the reporters like Aubrey Menon, the Indian-Irishman, or Simon Dring, the reporter who got a nice job owning his own Bangladeshi TV channel, financed by the Awami League; he's the one who reported all the mass killings of Bangladeshis.

These can hardly be called creditable witnesses. I know that war crimes happened, but noone presents any evidence for the scale of war crimes you claim occurred. It's all just empty words until you find some solid proof.

The most scientific of all proofs has come from a Bengali, herself. Professor Sarmila Bose, from George Washington State University, USA, has done research on the 1971 War. Her reputation is impeccable, and she's made a highly reputable and creditable name for herself in the USA. I would say that her research is worth a thousand of those by Rummel, or Dring or Menon or any Bangladeshi or Indian reporter, who obviously had a vested interest in making the events of 1971 look as gruesome as possible. Here is some snippets of her report. Incidentally, she has been to the sites in Bangladesh where such events are supposedly to have taken place, interviewed as many relevant people concerned as possible. A copy of her paper can be found here

http://www.drishtipat.org/1971/sarmila_paper.html

4.. Contradictory evidence on targeting of Hindus

To the West Pakistani authorities as well as many Bengali Muslims,
Bengali Hindus were a suspect population on the basis of their religious
affinity to India. In a civil war in which the secessionists were allied
with India, the Hindus of East Pakistan were in a very vulnerable
position.[33]

However, the case studies reveal contradictory evidence on the
targeting of Hindus. The attack on old Dhaka during 'Operation
Searchlight' appears to have been on the basis of religion. While Hindu
professors were accused of fomenting trouble at Dhaka University, and
Professor Guhathakurta (a Hindu) was asked his religion before being shot,
the other faculty member killed with him was Professor Maniruzzaman (a
Muslim). In fact, as three relatives were killed with Professor
Maniruzzaman, four Muslims and one Hindu were killed at that particular
building that night.

The villagers of Khulna who were fleeing to India via Chuknagar in May
say they were doing so due to harassment - but by local Bengali Muslims,
not the West Pakistani military. Local Bengali Muslims also appear to have
gained the most materially by the distress sales of the Hindu refugees, as
also from the loot from the dead at Chuknagar.

One male Hindu refugee, Nitai Gayen, who survived the shooting at
Chuknagar, offered this as explanation of why he was targeted: "I don't
think they targeted us (male refugees) because we were Hindus. I think
they targeted us because they considered us the 'enemy'. We were going to
India. Some of us would return, and we would not return empty-handed."[34]
In the end, in spite of the vulnerability of the Hindu population, the
conflict involving West Pakistanis, Biharis, loyalist Bengalis and
pro-liberation Bengalis remained predominantly a war of Muslims against
other Muslims.
http://www.drishtipat.org/1971/sarmila_paper.html

8.. No rape of women by Pakistan army found in any of the cases of
conflict

In all of the incidents involving the Pakistan army in the
case-studies, the armed forces were found not to have raped women. While
this cannot be extrapolated beyond the specific incidents in this study,
it is significant, as in many cases the allegation of rape was made along
with allegations of killing in prior verbal discussions or in some cases
even in written form in the Bengali literature. However, when Bengali
eye-witnesses, participants and survivors of the incidents were
interviewed they testified to the violence and killings, but also
testified that no rape had taken place.
http://www.drishtipat.org/1971/sarmila_paper.html

Does the message behind quote remind you of any Indians on here?

There is also the cultivation of an unhealthy 'victim culture' by some
of the pro-liberationists - hence the people of Chuknagar complain at
being left out of the official history books and vie to establish their
village as the site of the "biggest mass killing" in the country, and
people are instigated at the national level to engage in a ghoulish
competition with six million Jews in order to gain international
attention. All of these tendencies hamper the systematic study of the
conflict of 1971 and hinder a true understanding of a cataclysmic
restructuring in modern South Asian history.

Further research

The military action under 'Operation Searchlight', undertaken on 25-26
March, the raid on Dhaka University by the newly arrived governor General Tikka Khan, was condemned by Lt. Gen. A. A. K. Niazi.

In another evidence of a difference of opinion within the army about the execution of this operation, Nazrul Islam, then a student at the Art College, has written about how a group of soldiers shot him and two others in their hostel next to the EPR camp on 26 March, only to be followed by a second group of
soldiers who expressed shock that they had been shot, gave them water and
encouraged the two of them still alive to seek help and live.[13]

"One thing is clear - the atrocities did not just go one
way, though Bengali Muslims and Hindus were certainly the main
victims."[32] Many of the Bengali Muslim and Hindu victims are also found
to have suffered at the hands of other Bengalis. (Sisson & Rose)

Based on in-depth case studies of several specific incidents of
violence in 1971, this paper presents a systematic analysis of the context
and nature of violence in that conflict. The analysis uses data collected
during 2003-2005 in Pakistan and Bangladesh from site visits, interviews
with survivors, eye-witnesses and participants, and related material such
as images and memoirs (many in the Bengali language). The case studies are
from different districts, different moments of the time-line of the
conflict, and involve different groups of perpetrators and victims. They
are drawn from my ongoing project '1971: Images, Memory, Reconciliation',
and provide the basis for an analytical approach that challenges both the
silence and the unsubstantiated rhetoric that have obscured the study of
the conflict of 1971 to date.

"It speaks volumes for the discipline of the West Pakistan army," wrote
Mascarenhas, "that its officers were able to keep the soldiers in check
during what was to them a nightmare of 25 days."
[9] Shil in Haider, ed. (1996).
http://www.drishtipat.org/1971/sarmila_paper.html