Categorized | Current Affairs, Pak CA

1971: Why the surrender?

Posted on 16 December 2011. Tags:

Email
Share

Some Indians crow about the victory in 1971. That ephemeral victory has been the downfall of Bharati democracy too. 1971 created a Nuclear South Asia, possibly a Nuclear Iran. It hardened Chinese positions, and created difficulties for the USSR a decade later. Zia Ul Haq sent a telegram reminding the Moscow of Pakistan’s revenge.

Within Bharat itself, the brutal emergency consolidated the stranglehold of the Nehru dynasty–which brought untold misery on South Asia. Nehru’s attempt to impose Bharat on 560 states manifests itself into the desire of 50 new states to lean away from Delhi in varying degrees of independence from the Central Authority. Assam and kashmir want nothing to do with “India”. Maharashtra wants to the Hindu Republic. Gujarat wants to impost Ram Rajha. The restless Tamils have blackmailed Dlehi into disproportional representation in the Center–hence Talangana and other such movements. Bharat has aggravated the Chinese, the Bengalis, the Pakistanis, the Lankans, the Nepalese, the Bhutanese, the Sikkimese and the Maldivians. All neighbors are pissed off. Bharat has tried to impose itself on all peoples. Internally Bharat has alienated the 450 million Dalits and Scheduled classes and Untouchables, the 150 million Muslims–else all of us would be rooting for Bharat.

Imagine a world where Bharat is supported by all her neighbors? Bharat can only get that if it fundamentally reinvents itself–instead of imposing itself and its ideals on other nations. Neither Bharati secularism nor Bharat’s version of democracy have provided Bharati citizens a good life. The Koreans, The Taiwanese, the Malysians, and the Dubaiits, and the Chinese have. That is the right model. Bharati penury stricken caste infested, corruption system is for the birds.

Bharat cannot impress its neighbors by buying trinkets that turn to rust

Bharat is incapable of introspection. Meager success in the past decade has given the Bharatis a swollen head. This has to be brought back to size, either through pinata action or through Exedrin–we don’t know. However the self image is distorted–and does not reflect reality. If the self image is too far off from how others perceive you, then it is a sign of insanity–on a national level it is a pathological illness which manifests itself in the kind of failures and isolation that Bharat faces today.

The military surrender was a different blow—devastating and beyond imagination. The manner in which it took place, without a full fight given to the enemy, and the senior military commanders laying down their arms with no sign of remorse, compounded the disgrace. The humiliation and the anger felt by the masses, and more so by the fighting men, who were cheated by their top commanders, lingers in their minds.

This is the time of the year when Bharati propaganda is at its most virulent and explosive form. The BJP changed the curriculum in Bharat and it represents Hindu dogma disguised as history. This Temple Indoctrination is pervasive and ubiquitous even among the elite. One Urban myth exaggerates the number of Pakistani soldiers that were present in Muslim Bengal, others simply embellishes what was happening. All construed and directed to malign, and disparage Pakistan, Pakistanis, and Muslims.  Pakistan never had 93,000 soldiers in Muslim Bengal. It has about 20,000 soldiers and about 17,000 razakars. That was it. However Bharati propaganda continue to harp on half-truth, innuendo and lies. There were 93,000 prisoners, but they were mostly government officials, teachers, employees and other Biharis who were trying to get back home.

Here is a dose of sanity from Sarmila Bose.

‘Dead Reckoning’ redefines history of 1971

East Bengal Map

1971 in the light of new research by Sarmila Bose. Image via Wikipedia

Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose: This ground-breaking book chronicles the 1971 war in South Asia by reconstituting the memories of those on opposing sides of the conflict. 1971 was marked by a bitter civil war within Pakistan and war between India and Pakistan, backed respectively by the Soviet Union and the United States. It was fought over the territory of East Pakistan, which seceded to become Bangladesh. Through a detailed investigation of events on the ground, Sarmila Bose contextualises and humanises the war while analysing what the events reveal about the nature of the conflict itself. The story of 1971 has so far been dominated by the narrative of the victorious side. All parties to the war are still largely imprisoned by wartime partisan mythologies. Bose reconstructs events via interviews conducted in Bangladesh and Pakistan, published and unpublished reminiscences in Bengali and English of participants on all sides, official documents, foreign media reports and other sources. Her book challenges assumptions about the nature of the conflict, and exposes the ways in which the 1971 war is still playing out in the region.

Product code: 455601, ISBN13: 9781849040495, 288 pages, paperback, Published by C Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd in 2011

SARMILA BOSE is Senior Research Fellow in the Politics of South Asia at the University of Oxford. She was a political journalist in India and combines academic and media work. She was educated at Bryn Mawr College and Harvard University.

Ms. Sharmila Bose in her paper entitled “Losing the Victims: Problems of Using Women as Weapons in Recounting the Bangladesh War”  paints a picture of the Pakistani military as a disciplined force that spared women and children. She writes:

  • During my field research on several incidents in East Pakistan during 1971, Bangladeshi participants and eyewitnesses described battles, raids, massacres and executions, but told me that women were not harmed by the army in these events except by chance such as in crossfire. The pattern that emerged from these incidents was that the Pakistan army targeted adult males while sparing women and children.

She also quotes the passage from the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report that I cited above to support her assertion that so many rapes could not have occurred. 20,000-34,000 could not have raped 200,000 to 400,000 women in the space of nine months.

She states in the introduction:

  • That rape occurred in East Pakistan in 1971 has never been in any doubt. The question is what was the true extent of rape, who were the victims and who the perpetrators and was there any systematic policy of rape by any party, as opposed to opportunistic sexual crimes in times of war.
  • To try to bolster her argument that the Pakistani forces in Bangladesh could not have raped so many women, she claims:
  • The number of West Pakistani armed forces personnel in East Pakistan was about 20,000 at the beginning of the conflict, rising to 34,000 by December. Another 11,000 men — civil police and non-combat personnel — also held arms.
  • For an army of 34,000 to rape on this scale in eight or nine months (while fighting insurgency, guerrilla war and an invasion by India), each would-be perpetrator would have had to commit rape at an incredible rate.
  • There are numerous reports out there now which negates the well established beliefs. The declassified US reports, Indian military officers account, Pakistan military officers account, General Niazi’s memoirs, Sharmila Bose, Hamoodurahman commission report.

Pakistan Military officers fought hard. Many foreign correspondents speak well of their bravery. It is the bravery of a Muslim soldier that Indian Military got tough fight. These Pakistani Mard-e-Momin fought so hard that they had almost regained the control of East Pakistan from the dirty hands of Mukt-Bahini. When India saw this, She then started the military action which resulted in the fall of Dhaka.

Then  Mujib showed his true colors after the formation of Bangladesh with his BAKSAL party. How he became authoritative and usurped democracy is not a secret anymore. He was going to make Bangladesh part of India that he was killed timely by the Pakistani military officers (yes those Bengalis who never gave up allegiance to Pakistan. I stand in honor for them).

In the end, 1971 was an ephemeral event for Bharat. It forced Pakistan to go Nuclear, and the events of 1971 created parity between Bharat which is 9 times bigger than its neighbor, and Pakistan. It also focused Pakistan towards Central Asia, blocking trade of Bharat with the region north of the Amu Darya. The events of 1971 created turmoil in Afghanistan, and an overconfident USSR, encouraged by Bharati policy makers ventured into Afghanistan. Exactly 20 years after the events of December 16th, 1971, the USSR imploded. On 17th December 1971 the USSR ceased to exist. Pakistan had exacted its revenge on the Soviet Union for assisting Bharat. The events of 1971 also created a huge schism between Bharat and China which has not been bridged, despite the fact that China uses Bharat as a mining colony taking raw materials and exporting back shoddy Chinese goods which it cannot export to the West.

  • 1971 was the worst form of terror in this century. The fact that the West tolerated the Bharati plan of sending 80,000 armed terrorists disguised as Pakistani soldiers into Bengal to create havoc with the local population is a fact that lives in ignominy. The West sanctified Bharati aggression and stood back and watched the disintegration of a state which which the US had two Executive Defense pacts and was also tied into defense agreements in SEATO and CENTO.
  • 1971 led to Pakistan’s JF-17 Thunder and Nuclear and Missile programs which have created colossal headaches for Bharat and others that have supported it. Because of the nuclear weapons, the US could not invade Pakistan, like it invaded Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. The American defeat in Afghanistan is a direct result of the events of 1971 and Pakistan’s Nuclear status. As the US begins to leave the area before 2014, the inevitable union of Afghanistan and Pakistan will ensure robust trade with Central Asia and strategic depth for Pakistan and Afghanistan both.
  • 1971 halted economic growth in South Asia. Bharat was a pariah nation for a decade after that–and the entire region has still to recover from the effects. Bangladesh has half the GDP of Pakistan. Bharat has been unable to convince Pakistan to allow it a land route to Iran and Europe. The economic cost of the barrier to Bharati trade is colossal.
  • 1971 galvanized Kashmir and tied down 800,000 Bharati soldiers and the militancy rages on affecting the rest of Bharat. The entire region became radicalized, and Asama dn the Naxals control large swathes of Bharati territory where there is no writ of the Central Government.
  • 1971 gave rise to fundamentalism in Bharat. With the rise of the BJP and RSS, the nature of the Bharati landscape has changed. Its clash with the West is inevitable and will bring tragic results to South Asia.
  • The events of 1971 brought about the Oil embargo on the West with a decade of recession and malaise which radicalized America and moved it to the right. The events of 1971 radicalized Arab youth, and created the OBLs of the world. The events of 971 brought about two Martial Laws in Pakistan which led to various issues in the society and for the region. It allowed the US claim a stake in the neighborhood.
  • 1971 radicalized Bharati society and created militant Muslim groups in Bharat. The Indian Mujahideen and SIMI and others will continue to grow in the slum infested waters of penury and poverty.
  • The events of 1971 galvanized the Nazal insurrection in Bharat and the Maoist insurgency in Nepal, deeply affecting Bharat.
  • The vents of 1971 forced Pakistan to look Westward. It now thinks of South Asia as its past the Central and West Asia as its future.
  • 1971 consolidated Pakistan as never before, and with the discovery of Coal and Gold reserves, the country is reevaluating its political landscape and bringin in new leadership to deal with the new realities of prosperity and growth.

In the end Bangladesh also became a belligerent state for Bharat, deeply impacting the demographics of West Bengal, which is now headed towards Muslim majority status. Bangladesh itself is in a Civil war with itself. Right after 1971, Mujib, the Indian agent declared himself dictator for life and banned all the political parties that existed. On 14th August 1974 patriotic patriots killed Mujib and threw his body in the streets for days. They killed all members of the Mujib family. In a dramatic reversal of events, Bhart’s “Rakhi Bahni” which had planned to incorporate Bangladesh into an Indian province was thrown out of Bangladesh, the treaty of friendship was torn up and Delhi’s dream of taking over Muslim Bengal never materialized.

The events of 1971 laid bare the intentions of the US, and its lack of support. This has led to a colossal tide of anti-Americanism in Pakistan and the region which is detrimental to America and Europe. Eventually China and Russia ware the beneficiaries of this sort of avoidable negativity.

The Bangladeshis resurrected the Two Nation Theory, and refused to join West Bengal. Despite persecution of the Islamic forces, Bangaldesh remains a deeply relgiosu nation and has better relations with Islamabad than it has with Delhi. The supression of Islam in Bangladesh has created a time-bomb that will affect the entire Northeast region.

The events of 1971 has led to a large presence of Chinese forces and possibly bases in Pakistan. Islamabad constructed two new ports, an effort unparallelled in the history of the world.

References:
1) Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULpCroezFrY
2) Read “RAW in Bangladesh by ZainulAbidin (an ex-Mukti Bahini member) on 1971 war.
3) Read Blood and tears by a Pakistani writer about 1971 war.
4) Check the website of Federation of American Scientist on 1971 war
5) Read “East Pakistan Tragedy” by L.F. Rushbrook Williams.

6) The India Doctrine by M.B. Munshi

Related articles

References:
1) Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULpCroezFrY
2) Read “RAW in Bangladesh by ZainulAbidin (an ex-Mukti Bahini member) on 1971 war.
3) Read Blood and tears by a Pakistani writer about 1971 war.
4) Check the website of Federation of American Scientist on 1971 war
5) Read “East Pakistan Tragedy” by L.F. Rushbrook Williams.

Related articles

 

The “Blame Pakistan first” uses 1971 to disparage the raison d’etre and the the basis for the creation of Pakistan. The Najam Sethi gang use it to further their own agenda. The new generation which has not lived through the traumatic events of 1971 are at a disadvantage—because the only narrative available to them is the biased Bharati one, or the demented one given doled out to them by the opponents of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto or the liberal elitist who want to use it to vindicate their secular point of view. The religious parties have somehow monopolized patriotism. The history of 1971 from the nationalistic point of view is missing. There is a void.

Britain's holdings on the Indian subcontinent ...

1971: US warship deployment was psychological warfare targeting the Pakistani leaders. Image via Wikipedia

The political chaos in 1971 and the India-Pakistan War culminating in secession of Pakistan’s Eastern Wing was the product of a deeply planned plot executed by a joint axis of United States, Israel, Britain, India and former Soviet Union. Its mastermind was a series of unfortunate events that were taken advantage of by the enemies of Pakistan.The plot could not have succeeded without the active participation of a treacherous gang of civil and military leaders within Pakistan. Zaid Hamid places blame on a conspiracy theory.

  • Zaid Hamid sets the record straight about East Pakistan For the past 40 years, a historical lie has been propagated by Indians about East Pakistan. The dirty role of Indian government and mass genocide of Pakistanis in East Pakistan at the hands of RAW trained terrorists of Mukti Bahini has been hidden in the pages of history. Now for the first time truth is revealed:
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?
  • v=dZxmJ97qqdE http://www.facebook.com/pages/Syed-Zaid-Zaman-Hamid-
  • Official/244922893101 [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZxmJ97qqdE]

Books and articles have been published in Bangladesh on how the East Pakistanis were made the victims of a vast scheme to give up a part of their own country. Same lament was expressed earlier in books such as Subversion in East Pakistan, by AMK Maswani,Second Thoughts on Bangladesh, narrated by a repentant rebel, and Bangladesh Today—Indictment and a Lament, by the distinguished East Pakistani intellectual Matiur Rahman.

Dibader says that:

East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, may still one day rejoin with the parent country. People in both the Wings are ready to forgive and forget. No one doubts that they were made the victims of an international conspiracy that included the services of several local agents. The Muslim people of Bangladesh are now conscious that they were deceived by their own ‘native’ leaders, into giving up the larger part of their own country, thus depriving themselves of the land and all its resources. They have also realized that they were misled by design into looking upon Indians as their friends and West Pakistanis as enemies. They have learnt the truth was exactly the opposite; Hindu India was their real enemy, and it will remain so.

Dibedar accurately describes the sentiments “but the military surrender was a different blow. It was devastating. It was totally unexpected, and beyond imagination. The manner in which it took place—without a full fight given to the enemy, and the senior army and navy commanders laying down their arms with no sign of remorse—compounded the disgrace. The pain of humiliation and the anger felt by the masses, and much more so by the fighting men, who had been cheated by their top commanders, lingers in their minds.”

The narrative of General Kamal Mateen does not make it to the anchors and the politicians. “A Tragedy of Errors” describes the details of the tragedy.

Dilbedar further describes it as:

  • There is plenty of literature on the 1971 Crisis and the India-Pakistan War, but several devious and decisive schemes and maneuvers that nurtured the crisis and shaped its outcome are still to be exposed. Amongst these is the story of the shameful surrender inflicted on Pakistan. What forced the sudden and humiliating surrender on 16 December1971, in just three and a half weeks of fighting, after India’s full-scale launching of the war by attackingsimultaneously as many as 23 salients along the border in East Pakistan on the night 20/21 November?
  • The writings of Americans on the 1971 episode are a rich (though for us Pakistanis sorrowful) source of revelations about many of the otherwise less known occurrences. Henry Kissinger’s voluminous work, The White House Years, is one example. When the relevant written material is placed beside the events that took place before, during and after the war, the analysis exposes the US hand in fomenting rebellion by the Awami League against the State, assisting India in raising, arming and deploying the Mukti Bahni terrorists in East Pakistan, then provoking the war and devising a quick defeat for Pakistan.
  • The most revealing, and depressing, tale is to find how the top leaders in East and West Pakistan were duped into yielding to the idea of military surrender. The Indians had not expected even in their wildest estimates that the Pakistan forces in the Eastern Wing would surrender in just three weeks of fighting. Even reaching Dacca was not in their war plan.  Indian army officer, Major General Sukhwant Singh, who was on active duty in 1971 and later authored a book on the war, after pointing out the “formidable obstacles” that prevented an advance to Dacca, writes; “Because of these limitations the higher command, in assigning tasks to Eastern Command, did not spell out the capture of Dacca but left it to be considered during the conduct of operations as and when opportunity offered itself.”1

General Nizi’s book blames everything squarely on the political and miltiary leadership of West Pakistan.

Delbedar says “Indeed, in spite of the serious handicaps (which anyway are a part of warfare) the Pakistan forces in the Eastern Wing could have fought on for several more weeks. Pointing out the quantum of troops, weapons and supplies at the time of ceasefire in the Northwestern Sector in East Pakistan, Sukhwant Singh observes: “It showed that most of the Pakistani units were up to operational strength and had a considerable potential to continue the war, if General Niazi had not accepted such an early ceasefire.”2

Military surrender is actually alien to the psychological make-up as well as the combat spirit and discipline of the Pakistani soldier. What caused the surrender?

Flag of the Pakistan Army

Military surrender is actually alien to the psychological make-up as well as the combat spirit and discipline of the Pakistani soldier. What caused the surrender? . Image via Wikipedia

 

  • It was obvious from the known circumstances surrounding the surrender that the Indians had no part in bringing it about. They joined in the scheme only at the later stages; and the reward, of course, was reaped by them. The surrender was brought about by the US with masterful machinations, involving disinformation, secret diplomacy, bands of spies and local agents in Pakistan and India and manipulation of the pliant persons who had been selectively placed in key positions in Islamabad and Dacca. The master stroke was the highly deceptive dispatch of the US naval forces to the Bay of Bengal.
  • The dramatic deployment of the US warships performed the pivotal role in the grand maneuver of deception and psychological warfare targeting the Pakistani leaders. Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, Chief of Naval Operations of the US Navy in 197I is the best narrator of this drama, though he was not privy to the secret treacherous aim behind it, which only Kissinger and the other Zionist schemers knew. In On Watch: A Memoir, Zumwalt writes:
  • “On 10 December, a Presidential order, that was not discussed with the Navy in advance, created Task Group (TG) 74, consisting of the nuclear carrier Enterprise and appropriate escorts, and sent it steaming from the Gulf of Tonkin to Singapore. The order did not specify what TG 74’s mission was, nor could anyone, including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, tell me.
  • The ships were held off Singapore for two days. On 12 December they were ordered through the Straits of Malacca into the Indian Ocean. Within an hour that order was rescinded! Next day it was reissued, with the additional proviso that as much of the passage through the Straits as possible be in daylight, in other words, in full view of the world. At the same time ‘sources’ in Washington let it be known that
    the object of the exercise was covering the evacuation of American civilians from Dacca.
  • This clearly was a cover story since that evacuation, after having been impeded by the fighting for a week, was successfully completed two days before TG 74 entered the Indian Ocean. (After entering the Indian Ocean) the Task Group was sent south of Ceylon (where it kept cruising leisurely). Then, on 8 January, TG 74 was ordered out of the Indian Ocean as mysteriously as it had been ordered in.”3
  • Admiral Zumwalt complains: “I still do not know exactly what to think of the TG 74episode. Obviously it could not have been intended to influence the course of the war in East Bengal. On the contrary, the Group was not formed until the outcome in East Bengal was perfectly clear.”
  • Zumwalt is right about finding no one who knew of TG 74′s mission. Not even President Nixon knew it. Nixon in fact has given just one casual sentence to this entire episode in his memoirs, and says; “Later that afternoon (on 9 December) I authorized Admiral Moorer (Chairman ofthe Joint Chiefs of Staff) to dispatch a task force of 8 ships including the aircraft carrier Enterprise from Vietnam to the Bay of Bengal.”4
  • The mission of the Task Group was a Zionist secret known only to Henry Kissinger and a handful of Zionist schemers from the CIA and the Israeli Mossad, who together were conducting the operations for dismemberment of United Pakistan. The Task Group was directly controlled (as also indicated by Zumwalt) from the White House, in other words by Kissinger, who was the National Security Advisor in the White House.
  • The Naval Task Force was used as a lethal instrument for a psychological purpose. It wasto act as a flash signal of support to the dispirited leaders in Pakistan, who were facing a desperate situation in the war, so as to boost their morale with the hope that US military help had arrived after all; and then after a couple of days, to cancel the signal abruptly, causing in Pakistan’s military leaders a sudden and complete collapse of morale rendering them incapable of resistance to the offer of ceasefire with surrender.

The Hamood Ur Rehman Commission describes the events, but it is not totally comprehensive.

Delbedar says “This was exactly what happened. Disinformation about the mission of TG 74 was conveyed through various ‘reliable‘ sources to the top brass in Islamabad: General Yahya, General Hamid, Lieutenant General Gul Hassan – and through the latter to Lieut General Niazi in Dacca. Gul Hassan, then Chief of the General Staff, described the episode in an interview in 1984″:

  • “A couple of days before the fall of’ Dacca, while we still had telephone contact with the East Wing, I passed a message to Niazi, which I had received from General Hamid who had apparently got it from General Yahya, that the United States and China are coming to help us.”5
  • In his autobiography, published in 1993, he confirms it and says he passed the message to Niazi “on the evening of 12 December 1971.”6 In his own memoirs, Niazi refers to the message with bitterness, which is understandable.7

Field Marshall Ayub Khan’s diaries published by Guahar Ayub are a good description but he lays the blame on the shoulders of Bhutto and Mujib.

Dlibedar says “The message immediately perked up the spirits of the generals, especially that of the beleaguered General Niazi. Just after the message had sunk in the minds of the recipients and their sagging spirits had lifted, the Americans flashed a new message to them: that the impression that any US help was on the way was misplaced and that the US Task Group had no such mission! This shattering piece of news acted as the last blow to the fragile will of Pakistan’s spineless military and civil leaders, whose nerves were already frayed by the enemy’s other tactics of psychological warfare; and they ceased to resist the pressure for surrender”. The writer is an analyst of the global plot of world control.Email: dilbedar@yahoo.com

Notes:

  1. Sukhwant Singh, India’s Wars Since Independence, Vol 1, The Liberation of   Bangladesh, Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi, 1980, p. 91.
  2. Ibid, p. 177.
  3. Elmo R. Zumwalt, On Watch: A Memoir, The New York Times Book Co, Inc, New York, 1976, p. 367.
  4. Richard Nixon, RN: The Memoirs of Richard Nixon, Crosset and Dunlap, Publishers, New York, 1978, p. 525.
  5. Ahmad Munir, Almiya Mashriqi Pakistan: Panch Kirdar, (Urdu), Atish Fashan, Publications, Lahore, 1984, p. 107.
  6. Gul Hassan Khan, Memoirs of Lt. Gen. Gul Hassan Khan, Oxford University. Press, Karachi, 1993, p. 328
  7. Lt. Gen. (R) A. A. K. Niazi, The Betrayal of East Pakistan, Oxford University, Press, Karachi, p. 186.

PAKISTAN: Mega Deception that Forced the Surrender in 1971 21
Dec, 2009, Commodore Tariq Majeed (PN) Retd.

Related articles
Email
Share

Comments are closed.


Read Rupee News in your language

Translate. into Chinese, Arabic, German etc.Click Here

Categories

Archives