A Bangali Perspective...

[Hasan_Ali_Imam]

Brs. ASB and Jaanam,

Hope you are well. Br. ASB, I have nearly completed my response to your previous post. Here are the topic titles I will be discussing inshallah (Br. Janaam, I will make a short reply as well).

Topics that will be covered:

1. The Virtue of Objectivity

2. Objectivity not adhered to:

2.1. Your views of the crimes committed by West Pakistani soldiers
2.2. Your lack of views on Bangladeshis killing Biharis or Hill Tract people

3. Br. Jaanam’s views on the crimes committed by West Pakistani soldiers

4. Islam or Culture? – back to br. ASB

5. Islam – personal or political?

6. Sheikh Mujib on brotherhood II

7. Conclusion

Wassalam
Hasan

[yayati]

Hasan, please engage your brain. You sound like a common village idiot who is ranting and raving for the wrong side.

Take away the vaneer of trying to sound intelligent and you are left with a man who has no knowledge and likes to be fed garbage by your local islamic fundamentalist.

Let us say that ASB has no objectivity. Let us also presume that I have no objectivity too, bus. Does this mean that *you* have total objectivity and no hidden agenda? That *you* and only *you* are earnestly searching for the truth? I doubt it since the truth is right in front of your face yet you make excuses for lies. You dart around shifting ground, lightfooted, you hurl asanine remarks.

If I saw a donkey I will call it a donkey. A donkey by any other skin still remains a donkey. A genocide still remains a genocide no matter what we think of it 30 or so years later. Who can kill so many people so callously - A machine? No. Men do. Humans do. Humans are capable of so many things. They are capable of sheilding themselves with lies and excuses in order to make themselves feel better.

Moreover, I think we should not compare apples to oranges when you compare things like that Genocide to what is happening today. Today, we have democracy. Today at least there are advocates and there are ears to listen. Yesterday was a horror story with which we should learn from. Yesterday is being forgotten and a new yesterday is being created in order to bring about a tommorow which you seek. We (ASB and the likes) will not let that happen.

Do not divert the point away from the genocide. Yes, we should look to our actions, our faults, here and now but let never forget that we were victims yesterday and this will help us become strong and a kind people.

I believe some sort of deal was done with the Chittogong hill tract peoples (I don't know of any new insurgency problems). I believe it was a topological error at the time of partition. Again, the focus of all our problems lie in the event of the Partition of India. I can't say whether it should or shouldn't have happened, all I know is, it was conducted wholly in the wrong manner. Whatever the case, it has happened now and let us not fight over that issue anymore rather look to build bridges with our regional partners and become stronger for it.

We cannot exist in isolation. We cannot exist without friends no matter how strong or capable we think we are.

[Hasan_Ali_Imam]

Br. Yayati,

Peace. Thanks for your comments. Will take your advice on board.

Hasan

[Hasan_Ali_Imam]

Br. ASB: Thanks for your valuable contribution to the debate on Islam, politics and Bengali idenity. Br. Janaam, hope you are still around as I will reply to you as well below inshallah. Here are my responses. Topics as follows:

1. The Virtue of Objectivity

2. Objectivity not adhered to:

2.1. Your views of the crimes committed by West Pakistani soldiers
2.2. Your lack of views on Bangladeshis killing Biharis or Hill Tract people and racism against Sylhetis


3. Br. Jaanam’s views on the crimes committed by West Pakistani soldiers

4. Islam or Culture? – back to br. ASB

5. Islam – personal or political?

6. Sheikh Mujib on brotherhood II

7. Conclusion


1. The Virtue of Objectivity

When I argued the case for objectivity and even-handedness regarding the events that led to the Civil War in 1971 your response was:

”Yes, let's look at things from the National Socialist (Nazi) and Stalinist points of view. I'm sure they were 'compelled' to commit their heinous crimes”.

The point you make is moot. We are focusing on the socio-political and economic situation in Pakistan-Bangladesh region and not Nazism nor Stalinism. Objectivity is something that should be practised when analysing any historical event, be it Bangladesh-Pakistan problems, Israel-Palestinian problems, Turkey-Cyprus problems etc. Failure to do so means that we become one sided and refuse to listen to our adversaries, which in turn leads to fanaticism at its best and murder (e.g. suicide bombings in Israel) at its worst. Examining both sides is exactly what independent public enquiries, court trials, investigations do and there is no room for pre-concieved notions nor bias. Indeed, if such an independent inquiry took place to ascertain why resources were being diverted from East Pakistan to West Pakistan and the subsequent atrocities committed by West Pakistani soldiers etc. I am sure that would yield interesting results...unfortunately, that is pie in the sky for that region.

Nazism – a short digression: As you had brought up the case of Nazism, let me digress here a little. If I try to understand the Nazi point of view, it does not logically follow that I would therefore support Nazi atrocities. I have come across Nazi and neo-Nazi literature in order to understand their position. I have read a part of Hitler’s book, ‘Mein Kampf’, but gave up because he made no sense whatsoever and some of his logic was laughable. I had also read magazines and articles by neo-Nazi groups...again they made no sense and their logic was the pinnacle of stupidity. Would you still stand by the comments you made (quoted above?) If so, then let me take this to the next level....

You might have heard of Dr. David Irving, who is a well known Holocaust revisionist and had published books like, ‘Hitler’s War’ where he portrays Hitler as a friend of the Jews and where he dismisses the 6 million figure for the Jewish death toll. You may recall a few years ago there was a trial, ‘David Irving (claimant) vs Penguin Books and Deborah Lipstadt (defendent)’, where Dr. Irving took Prof. Lipstadt to court for allegedly making false claims about his credibility. The judge, The Hon. Mr. Justice Gray, was even handed and objective and had removed all biases that he would have held, even though the common accepted view is that Hitler terrorised and murdered Jews and that about 6 million Jews died. Both parties were questioned and the case notes provide an insight into the detailed arguments from both sides. What was revealing was the lack of logical arguments from the revisionist side (Dr. Irving). This is demonstrated by the fact that when he lost the court case, his excuse for losing (according to his website) was that a lot of money was poured into the Defendents’ side!

To conclude I would surmise that objectivity still has merits when looking into the arguments of opposing sides, be they Nazism, Stalinism etc. because that is the only way that facts and the veracity of arguments can be ascertained, not through emotions and pre-concieved notions. Do you still stand by the comments you made (quoted above)?




2. Objectivity not adhered to:

2.1. Your views of the crimes committed by West Pakistani soldiers

Statistical Reporting

Once we have agreed with the above paragraph, we can now proceed to examine the historical facts surrounding the genocide of Bengalis. In my previous post I asked you about the reference that points to the genocide of 3 million Bengalis by Pakistani soldiers. You did point me to Prof. Rummel’s work and I am grateful for that reference. As I suspected, the 3 million figure has not been verified and estimates lie between 1.5 million to 3 million. This was in fact the first time I had heard of the 1.5 million figure, up till know everyone had given me the 3 million figure. See what happens when emotions get in the way of objectivity? Only God knows what the actual figure is and inshallah we will find out on Judegement Day. And I agree with you that the figure isn’t that important, what is important is the crimes that the Pakistani soldiers had committed. However, if a statistic is mentioned, then it stands to reason to verify the information, which you had done with regards to the 1.5 million – 3 million figure (which in turn are estimates), but failed to do when you quoted the statistic where 95% of the crimes committed in East Pakistan were by West Pakistani soldiers. When I asked you about this your response was defensive and irrelevant, this is what you said:

“Bro, please! The war was fought on Bangladeshi soil....it doesn't take a genius to figure that the overwhelming number of casualties and atrocities were carried out by the Pakistani army and it's hireling traitor Razakaar's...”

If a statistic which one quotes cannot be verified, then it makes no sense to present that statistic in the first place. And if a figure is presented, then it is in the right of the reader to demand the evidence of that figure.

We can both agree that we need not quibble over numbers So let’s delve into more important things...


Punishment for crimes committed

If we leave aside the discussion on numbers and statistics, which both of us are willing to do, and focus on the crimes themselves, then we can talk about the punishments that should be meted out to West Pakistani thugs who raped and murdered Bengalis.

I was very clear in my previous posts that if an Islamic (and I repeat NOT Islamist, political Islam etc.) system was implemented and the Pakistani soldiers stood trial and were found guilty, then they should be be-headed. That is the punishment they deserve, do you agree with this?


2.2. Your lack of views on Bangladeshis killing Biharis or Hill Tract people and racism against Sylhetis

What is surprising is that there had been reports of Bengalis killing Bihari civilians, on the basis that they were collabaters (no trials were undertaken), but you deemed it fit to ignore this. Furthermore, the fact that the Bangladeshi Government had oppressed and subdued the Chittagong Hill Tract people, as well as the abhorrent treatment that Sylhetis receive from non-Sylhetis, were brushed aside by yourself by stating that these examples were specious point(s).

I think you have proven my point regarding the downside of nationalism where objectivity is replaced by emotions. Justice should be the order of the day and whoever commits murder or oppression should be condemned. Once we start to side with a particular cultural and religious group fervently then we tend to overlook the wrongs committed by our own side. That is why you would see many Muslims living in denial that Muslims can commit atrocities, or West Pakistanis living in denial that their government had committed atrocities against East Pakistanis or Americans living in denial that their government had killed innocent people in various wars or the Zionists living in denial that their governement had unleashed terror on Palestinian civilians....and in this case, many Bangladeshis refusing to comment on the mistreatment of Biharis and Hill Tract people. This is the danger of nationalism and tribalism. Thank God for the Islamic concept of human brotherhood which needs to be practised today more than ever.


3. Br. Jaanam’s views on the crimes committed by West Pakistani soldiers

Br. Janaam, you had stated that RAW was involved in the separation of East Pakistan from West Pakistan, as well as propaganda where figures were exaggerated. A few questions I would like to pose:

a) Can you please refer me to the evidence that supports your claims? If you don’t have evidence, why then make such a statement?

b) A few years ago, I visited the Pakistani Embassy in order to get their version of what happened prior to 1971. They said that they didn’t have information to hand and that I should go to the Bangladesh embassy to get the info. Don’t you think that their response was strange? If they were adamant that it is all RAW’s fault, then why the hesitancy in providing such information?

c) Do you agree that Pakistani Govt, had unethically re-directed resources to West Pakistan hence oppressing their brothers in the East which is against Islam?

d) Do you agree that Pakistani soldiers had killed civilians and that they should be punished, i.e. be-headed if found guilty?

e) Do you agree that Pakistani nationalism has been a factor in oppression of your brothers in East Pakistan thereby denying their rights and murdering the civilians? If so, then would you condemn nationalism? If not, please explain why you would choose nationalism at the expense of Islamic brotherhood.

f) Have you honestly read and understood both sides of the argument? If so, I’d be interested to know what sources you have used to arrive at your conclusions.


4. Islam or Culture? – back to br. ASB

Let me repeat what I said before. Let us ignore the labels that had recently been invented when referring to some Muslims, namely, ‘Political Islam’, ‘Islamist’, ‘Islamic Activism’, ‘Fundamentalism’, ‘Moderate Islam, ‘Secular Islam’ etc. Let us focus on Islam proper, i.e. the Quran and the example of the Prophet (S); and also the rightly guided caliphs. Can we agree that this is the ideal model that should be implemented? If not can you explain why the model cannot be implemented and what the best model would be?

In point 2 above, I had explained the dangers of tribalism, it leads to injustice and fracturing of the human brotherhood. This is not to say that we lose our cultural identities. We all have different identities based on different criteria, i.e. national, racial, gender, economic, religious. The overriding identity would be defined by our beliefs, do you agree? After all, on Judegement Day, God will judge us according to what we believed in and how we practised our beliefs. So why have different races and ethnicities? God has made it clear for us in Quran 49:13, it is a test for humans whether they take the differences as basis for despising adversaries or understanding them and using this as a platform to unite the human brotherhood.

I am still confused about your views on Islam vs culture. Do you consider Culture to be the overriding factor when dealing with others, or Islam (and I repeat many times, NOT Islamist, nor Political Islam, nor Fundamentalism etc.)? If culture, please argue your case. If Islam is the overriding factor and that the Ummah is (or should be!) one brotherhood, and that the whole of humanity is a brotherhood regardless of race or creed, then we have no argument and we can move on.

If you still have disagreements and prefer culture over religion (assuming they clash in certain aspects) then I invite you to consider the following real example: in our culture, the birth of girls are looked down on whilst boys are preferred. In fact if 3 or 4 boys are born, no one says anything, but if 1 girl is born and no boy, the older generation become glum and sad and if 2 girls are born then it’s Yaum ul Kiyama! We can both agree, this is wrong and from an Islamic point of view unjust. In this situation, would you prefer Islam which orders us to be just between boys and girls, or culture that prefers boys over girls? I am sure your answer will be Islam. If so, then you prefer Islam to culture where they clash. Why not use this criteria and apply it to all aspects of life? This process does not mean denying culture nor ethnicity, it merely encourages us to take the best from our culture and ALL other cultures within an Islamic framework.


5. Islam – personal or political?

I am also puzzled with your views on Islam being personalised have having little to do with contemporary society. This is my interpretation of your statement:

“So long as we stick to Ibadath and certain socio-cultural facet's of Islam, then I think most Bangali's would agree that Islam is very important to them personally. Anything more than that.... and we must remember that Bangladesh has been a moderate and largly apolitical (with regards to Islam), since independance”.

You mention in passing by that socio-cultural facets should be adhered to, a further elaboration of this statement is called for; nevertheless you limit Islam to the personal, implying that it has no value in politics, law, administration, military and economy. If this is the case then please read my response in the next paragraph, but if imy interpretation is incorrect then accept my apologies and move on to section 6 below.

Ok, so if you are reading this then I was correct in my understanding of your statement. So let me now ask you a few questions:

a) When Muhammad (S) implemented Islam and followed by the rightly guided caliphs, was it only personal, i.e. prayer and spiritual aspects? I am sure you would agree with me that it was not personal only, but had an effect on contemporary society through charity, planning of military campaigns, distribution of wealth, governance, legal systems being applied etc. If you agree with this then would it not follow that your argument for Islam to be personal only is baseless? If you disagree with this and believe that Islam proper (and I emphasise, NOT political Islam, Islamism, Fundamentalism etc.) was limited to the personal then on what basis do you argue this case?

b) If you agree that Islam practised by the prophet (S) and his companions (R) pervaded throughout the spiritual and soci-political realms, then it surely follows that the same model needs to be applied today. If you agree, then why limit Islam to the personal? If you disagree, then please explain and also simultaneously clarify your statement that you made in your previous post: ‘I believe that Islam as a political ideology, needs to be shackled and fettered in democracy’.



6. Sheikh Mujib on brotherhood II

Your views on Sheikh Mujib are interesting. In my previous post I had quoted statements made by Mujib regarding his sincerity in overlooking the diversion of economic resources from East to west, and trying to keep Pakistan united. All he demanded was the recognition of the six-point plan and a balance of resources, a justified demand. Hence, no one can claim that Mujib had conspired from day one to break up Pakistan, as Pakistani brothers believe. But as we know, things started to deteriorate and what happened was a natural consequence of oppression from West Pakistan.

Your claim that Mujib’s positive overtures (‘honeyed words’) to West Pakistan was a reflection of his weak position is an insult to his sincerity and effort to resolve the situation that would have yielded a win-win situation. He was not weak given that he commanded and influenced public opinion in East Pakistan and abroad. To support your argument, you cited the Argatala conspiracy case where Mujib was interned for apparent subversive activities. This in itself is not proof that he wanted to break up Pakistan. What evidence did the West Pakistani administration have against Sheikh Mujib’s alleged conspiracies? Your assertion is contradicted by the official Bengali line which states:

“...He was arrested and implicated in the false Argatala Conspiracy Case in January 1968 on charges of conspiring to topple the Government and turn East Bengal into an independent country with the active help of India. It was a nefarious design to discredit Sheikh Mujib and his followers....”

(Bangladesh Documents, Chapter 1 – Genesis of the Crisis)


Here are more statements from Sheikh Mujib himself, which should throw some light about his efforts in trying to resolve a serious problem. Both Pakistanis and Bangladeshis cannot claim that Mujib’s initial goal was to break up Pakistan:

“...We believe that this feeling of absolute equality, sense of inter-wing justice and impartiality is the very basis of Pakistani patriotism.....[further on he said]...sixthly, let me humbly remind my West Pakistani brothers and sisters that when we demanded Bengali to be made one of the two State Languages of Pakistan you condemned it as a move to undo Pakistan [he also talked about joint electorate]....but there has been no undoing of Pakistan...Does it not put you to shame that every bit of reasonable demand of East Pakistan has got to be secured from you at tremendous cost and after bitter struggle as if snatched from unwilling foreign rulers as a reluctant concession? Does it do you any credit? Please put a stop to such attitude once and for all. Please be brothers instead of rulers. In conclusion I fervently appeal to my countrymen to deeply ponder over the formula put forward by me. They will find that none of the items in my 6-point programme is either unjust, impractical or disruptive of the country’s integrity. I hope I have succeeded in the short space of this booklet, in showing that the acceptance of these points will not only weaken Pakistan, but will on the contrary make it stronger...”

(Sheikh Mujib, 23rd March 1966).


As you will agree, Sh. Mujib was very reasonable in his approach to problem-solving. This is also highlighted in his appeal he made at the Round Table Conference in March 1969:

“...We must therefore strain every nerve to agree upon and implement the required solutions. Let us strive together to lift our beloved Pakistan out of the tragic situation in which she is placed, and to lay the constitutional foundations for a real, living, Federal Parliamentary Democracy, which will secure for the people of Pakistan full political, economic and social justice. Only thus strong and united Pakistan can face the future with hope and confidence. Pakistan Zindabad.”

(Sheikh Mujib, quoted in The Dawn, Karachi, March 14 1969)


7. Conclusion

As a leader, Mujib tried to resolve problems that would have benefited BOTH parties and was willing to overlook the injustices against the Bengalis as long as the West Pakistanis accepted the six-point plan. As I mentioned before, this is leadership at its best. There were no conspiracies to break up Pakistan from the outset despite the flimsy evidence cited by Pakistani brothers in relation to the Argatala Case and the alleged involvement of RAW.

One of the rights that were denied to the Bengalis was for the Bengali language to be made a state language of Pakistan. Can you now see the fallacy of nationalism? In this case Pakistani nationalism forced this oppression on the East. When Pakistan oppressed the East in many other forms, the oppression was not due to ‘Political Islam’ nor ‘Fundamentalism’, it was West Pakistani nationalism and patriotism which refused to treat the Bengalis as brethren within the Islamic human brotherhood.

As for those who fought and died for the rights of people in the East, Sheikh Mujib offered Surah Fatiha in one of his rallys for these people (on 4th January 1971). This is the correct approach when innocent civilians had died. However, when victory celebrations are made every year for those who died, the Islamic framework had been absent...the celebrations were purely based on nationalism. This goes against what Sh. Mujib’s practice. In the 80s when President Ershad said that the souls of the mudrered freedom fighters should be prayed for, he was challanged and criticised by secularists, an unfortunate reaction. When I listen to the views of Bengali nationalists today, it is in stark contrast to the genuine efforts by Sheikh Mujib to maintain the brotherhood between the two wings whilst securing the rights of the oppressed people in the East. Many Bengalis today lay the blame for their oppression on all Pakistanis, i.e. some would hate any Pakistani person because of their government did over 30 years ago. This is a view that Sh. Mujib never took and he had absolved the Pakistanis from what their government had done, as he should in the spirit of Islamic brotherhood.


You ended with ‘Joy Bangla!’ in your previous post and I hope you realise that the slogan has nothing to do with independence but only in the context of identity. Let me end with what Sheikh Mujib ended with after his rally in Sylhet on 4th January 1971, ‘Narai Takbir!’

Wassalam
Hasan

[Hasan_Ali_Imam]

Assalamu Alaikum.

This thread was in free fall so I bounced it back up.

Hasan

[muftee]

Salaam to ALL! It is really very sad that persons like AS Bangla spreading hatered aginst some other muslim Ummah members, in this case Pakistan. Its painful to read such Ridiculous figures about things which we never investigated. WHO DID WHAT? Mr. Sonar! you are DOING NO favour to Bengali's or to muslim ummah. Just see around the world What is happenning with muslim Ummah, and WHAT you are talking about?
Let me make clear that I am NOT favouring any supression or killing. Not a single bangali or Pakistani should be killer in that conflict, because Both were and ARE loosers. Tell me from where you bring these statistical figures of killings and raped? WHO told you that all these crimes where done by Pakistani's? Who wer Mukti Bahni's? Where were Indian agents? There were Lot of talkings, BUT non know the truth. I have met and talked lot of Bangli's and I asked them about the crises and war of 1971. They told many things, BUT NONE had seen anything by own eyes, means it was and still classified as " HEARD ABOUTS" and for me ALL Heard Abouts have very LOW reliability, probably 1-2%.
Around the world I am seeing there is a tendency to update the figures of such crimes/ killings. What figures Mr. Soonar is given, were few years ago not that much. And surely after some years these figures will grow, its inflation to add some hundred thousands after time to time.
Mr Soonar! remember one thing if there will be some war/ crises at Bangladash ( I hope not and wish not) those WHO really will come for help and FIGHT, will be muslims and many many Pakistan's will be ready for that. Many of Bosnia's people OPENLY say now that in the war with Serbs, who really helped us was Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, BUT WEST only talked and condemned war only at media. Whole West was allied to Cristian Serbs and they let killings of Bosnien happenend 5 years.
So bells are RINGING for One Muslim UMMAH and against working the western/ jewish/ indian lobbies. India never accepted its division in 1947 and WAS/ IS and going to be REMAIN Enemy of Pakistan/ Bangladash and even Muslims.
It is NO TIME to GO around and Talk or TELL stories which increse the Distance between Muslims. IT is PART of Conspiration to keep DEPART muslims from one another as this strategy, " DIVIDE and RULE" must be visible if we have vision ( not sufficient with eyes). Check YOU ALL, that you might be a target of this conspiracy UNCONSCIOUSLY. It is NO time to TRANSFER your hatered to your youn generation born after 1971. TELL them their REAL Identity as a Muslim and LOVE UMMAH.
Allah Hafiz
muftee

[rini_h]

your a pakistani mufte, so you will say that. all the pakjisani people that come here always say dont bring it up or its the past or its not islamic or its not true. that pakistrani guy gohor ali even said that ther was no bangladesh! He called us East pakistan. how silly.

Its not to hate pakistani people but they did bad things in 1971 and bengali people know that and talk about that.