মাননীয় প্রধানমন্ত্রী

মাননীয় প্রধানমন্ত্রী, আমি বিশেষ্য বিশেষন দিয়ে তোষামোদি করতে জানিনা। তাই সরাসরি আমার কিছু না বলা কথা এবং কিছু হতভাগা মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের করুন ইতিহাস আপনার সদয় অবগতির জন্য মিডিয়ার সাহায্য নিতে বাধ্য হলাম।আপা, আমি একজন মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। মুজিবনগরে প্রশিক্ষণ নেয়া যোদ্ধা।
  স্বাধীনতাত্তোর বাংলাদেশে ১৯৭২ সালের ২রা মার্চ জাতিরজনক বংগবন্ধু/বাংলাদেশের প্রথম প্রধানমন্ত্রী শহীদ তাজুদ্দিন আহমেদ একজন মুক্তিযোদ্ধা হিসেবেই ১০ মিনিটের নির্দেশে ভূমি মন্ত্রণালয়ে চাকুরী প্রদান করেছিলেন। ৭ দিন কি ৮ দিন পায়ে হেটে না খেয়ে মুজিবনগরে গিয়ে মুক্তিযুদ্ধের প্রশিক্ষণ নিয়েছিলাম একটি স্বাধীন সার্বভৌম জাতিরাষ্ট্র প্রতিষ্ঠার নেশায়।

এ নেশা সাড়ে সাত কোটি মানুষের রক্তে মাংসে অস্তিত্বে মগজে সেলের মত বিধেছিল ১৯৭১ সালের ৭ই মার্চ "পশ্চিমা হানাদার বাহিনীর হাত থেকে বাংলাকে মুক্ত করতে হবে" জাতিরজনকের এই উদাত্ত আহবানে সারা দেয়া কী ভুল সিদ্ধান্ত ছিল? তাই আমি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। নামবিহীন অস্তিত্ববিহীন মুক্তিযোদ্ধা! নাম বদলে দিলাম। মোঃ মোকতেল হোসেন থেকে নাম বদলে হয়ে গেলাম মোকতেল হোসেন মুক্তি।
পরবর্তীতে জাতিরজনক বঙ্গবন্ধু ১৩ই এপ্রিল ১৯৭২ সালে মন্ত্রী পরিষদ গঠন করে প্রধানমন্ত্রী হলে মাদারীপুরের কৃতি সন্তান মহান মুক্তিযুদ্ধের অন্যতম সংগঠক খাদ্যমন্ত্রী প্রয়াত ফনি ভূষন মজুমদারের অনুস্বাক্ষরে বঙ্গবন্ধু প্রধানমন্ত্রী ত্রাণ তহবীল থেকে এক হাজার টাকার অনুমোদন (মাদারীপুর মহকুমা প্রশাসক অফিসে) এবং ৩ বান ঢেউ টিন প্রদান করেন।
ভূমি মন্ত্রণালয়ের কর্মচারীদের রেকর্ডে একজন মুক্তিযোদ্ধার কোটায় আমার চাকুরী হয়েছিল। স্বাধীন বাংলাদেশের সচিবালয়ে আমিই ভূমি মন্ত্রণালয়ের প্রথম নিয়োগপ্রাপ্ত কর্মচারী ছিলাম। আমার ডিউটি ছিল জননেত্রী শেখ হাসিনার ফুফা, বঙ্গবন্ধুর ভগ্নিপতি, সাবেক চীপ হুইপ আলহাজ্ব হাসনাত আব্দুল্লাহ সেরনিয়াবাত এর গর্বিত পিতা, যুবলীগের প্রতিষ্ঠাতা শেখ ফজলুল হক মনি ভাইয়ের শ্বশুর, সাংসদ ব্যারিষ্ঠার তাপসের নানা সাবেক কৃষক লীগের সভাপতি ভুমি মন্ত্রী ও পরবর্তীতে পানি সম্পদ মন্ত্রী শহীদ আব্দুর রব সেরনিয়াবাতের বাসায়।

ইতিহাসের ঘৃণ্য কালো অধ্যায় ১৫ঈ আগস্টের মধ্যযূগীয় বর্বর হত্যাকান্ডের লাশ দেখে আমি পাগল হয়ে যাই। পিজি হাসপাতালে আমার ৩ মাস চিকিতসা চলে এবং সে তিন মাসের বেতন ভূমি মন্ত্রণালয় কর্তন করে। এ কথা সকলেই জানেন।আমি ভারতের প্রশিক্ষনপ্রাপ্ত মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। আমার ঘরের সব কাগজপত্র আমার ভাইদের শিক্ষার সনদ, জমির দলিল দস্তাফেজ সমূহ সব মানসিক ভারসাম্য হারিয়ে ছিড়ে ফেলি। আমার পরিবারের সব আমি ধংস করে ফেলেছিলাম। ভুমি মন্ত্রনালয় তার প্রমান।
আমি মন্ত্রীকে এসব কথা বলাতে আমাকে অপমান করতে পারেন না। আমি প্রবাসে থাকি। আমাকে আবেদনের সুযোগ না দিয়ে অপমান করার অধিকার মন্ত্রীর নাই। তিনি আমার দরখাস্ত গ্রহন করা ও না করার অধিকার রাখেন কিন্তু মেজর জেনারেল সুবিদ আলীর নির্দেশে  আমাকে অপমান করতে পারেন না। তিনি আমার আবেদনে লিখেছেন
“যেহেতু আবেদনকারী বহুবার দেশে এসেছিলেন এবং আবেদন করেন নি তাই তার আবেদন গ্রহন করা গেল না”
তিনি মেজর জেনারেল সুবিদ আলীর শিখানো কথা মত বললেনঃ ৪৫ বছর পরে মুক্তিযোদ্ধা হতে এসেছে। বের করে দেন”।
আমি মুক্তিযোদ্ধাই নই, একজন সক্রিয় আওয়ামি যোদ্ধা। মুক্তিযুদ্ধ ছাড়া আমার জীবনে অন্য কোন বিষয় কাজ করেনি এবং এ মুক্তিযুদ্ধ বংগবন্ধ ও আওয়ামী লীগই আমার ধ্যান ধারনা চিন্তা চেতনা আদর্শ এ কথা প্রমান করে আমার ৬০ হাজার প্রায় লীফলেটস, ব্যানার ও পোষ্টার এশিয়ায় ইন্টারনেট চালু হবার পর থেকেই কার বিনা প্ররোচনায় করে এসেছি। শুধু তাই নয় আমি ২০০ ওয়েব সাইট ও ব্লগ মেইনটেইন করি যা’শুধু যুদ্ধাপরাধী মুক্তিযুদ্ধ ও বঙ্গবন্ধু ও আওয়ামী লীগ সংক্রান্ত। এ সকল ছবি ও ব্লগ/ওয়েবসাইটগুলোই প্রমান করে যে আমি মুক্তিযুদ্ধ নিয়ে রীতিমত একজন বদ্ধ উন্মাদসম গবেষক।
Just write my name on the google search engine where you’ll get real Identity of mine “write Moktel Hossain Mukthi or muktimusician.
এ ছাড়াও আমি একজন একনিষ্ঠ অনলাইন আওয়ামী যোদ্ধা। মালদ্বীপের বঙ্গবন্ধু পরিষদ এবং আওয়ামী লীগের প্রতিষ্ঠাতা ও সভাপতি, মালদ্বীপের মাটিতে আমিই সর্ব প্রথম মুক্তিযুদ্ধ বঙ্গবন্ধু এবং পাকিস্তানের ৩০ লক্ষ বাঙ্গালী হত্যাযজ্ঞের বিরুদ্ধে প্রকাশ্য জনসভায় বক্তৃতা প্রদান করে পাকিস্তান হাই কমিশনের মামলা খাওয়া একজন মালদ্বীপ সরকারের শিক্ষক।
মন্ত্রী মহোদয় এ সব পরিচয় জানার পরেও বলেন নি যে আপনি বসেন বা কিছু বরং তাঁর আচার ব্যবহার এতই রুঢ় ছিল যা’ শিবির বা জামাতের কারো সাথে করছেন বলে অনুমেয়। আমার সাথে ভদ্র ভাষায় কথাও বলেন নি। এক পর্যায়ে জেনারেল সুবিদ আলীর কথায় তিনি আমাকে ঘাড় ধরে তাঁর কক্ষ থেকে বেড় করে দেয়ার কথা বলেন এবং অতঃপর.........।।
তিনি মন্ত্রী না হলে হয়তো সেখানেই কোন দুর্ঘটনা ঘটে যেতো। আমি আমার নিজেকে নিয়ন্ত্রন করে চলে আসি। আমার সহযোদ্ধারা এখনো অনেকেই বেচে আছেন। ড: গোলাপ আমার সাথের একই ক্যাম্পের যোদ্ধা। আওয়ামি যোদ্ধা।
মুক্তিযোদ্ধা বিষয়ক মন্ত্রী সব সময় প্রচন্ড মিথ্যা কথা বলেন। যা' মিডিয়া ও বক্তৃতায় বলেন, বাস্তবের সাথে তার কোন মিল নেই; তিনি যা বলেন সব মিথ্যা কথা মিথ্যা তথ্য। এখনো বহু আসল মুক্তিযোদ্ধার নাম তালিকাভুক্ত করতে পারেনি অথচ তিনি বক্তৃতায় ঘোষনা করলেন সকল জীবিত মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের কথা রেকর্ড করা হবে। আসল অনেক মুক্তিযোদ্ধার নামই সংগ্রহ করতে পারেন নি-তিনি কিভাবে এ ঘোষনা প্রদান করেন? 
তার দেয়া সব তথ্য জাতিকে বিভক্ত করছে; মহান মুক্তিযুদ্ধের চেতনা কলঙ্কিত হচ্ছে। নতুন তালিকা প্রণয়নের নামে এগুলো প্রতারণা। মুক্তিযোদ্ধা বিষয়ক মন্ত্রী মিথ্যাচার করছেন। মিডিয়া, দেশবাসী এমন কি মাননীয় প্রধানমন্ত্রীকে প্রতারণা করছেন । দেশের প্রত্যন্ত অঞ্চলে উপজেলা ও জেলাসমূহে যে দুর্নীতি চলছে, যে সনদ ও মুক্তিযোদ্ধা যাচাই বাছাইয়ের নামে ব্যবসা বাণিজ্য শুরু হয়েছে তাতে আওয়ামী লীগের বিগত বছরগুলোর সকল সফলতা এমন কি মহান মুক্তিযুদ্ধে আওয়ামী লীগের যে অবদান সব মলিন হয়ে যাবে এই মুক্তিযুদ্ধ বিষয়ক মন্ত্রীদের মত স্বজনপ্রীতি দুর্নীতি গ্রস্থ নেতা/কমান্ডারদের কারনে।
কারন আপনি আদর্শিক কারনে মুক্তিযুদ্ধের ইতিহাস সংরক্ষন ও মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের মূল্যায়ন করছেন।  সমস্ত মন্ত্রী এম পি দের তৃনমূলের সাথে কোন সম্পর্ক নেই। ক্ষমতা ও অর্থ সম্পদ শালী মধ্য শ্রেণীর নেতা যার মধ্যে অর্ধেকই প্রায় জামাত শিবির ও বি এন পি, তাদের সাথে তাল মিলিয়ে, হাত মিলিয়ে আমার মত পাগল ছাগল নিবেদিত ত্যাগি সৎ নিষ্ঠাবান অভিজ্ঞ উচিত কথাবলার প্রকৃত মুক্তিসেনাদের এভাবেই তারা অপমান তাচ্ছিল্য করে দূরে সরিয়ে রাখে। যে কারনে ছাত্রলীগের ছেলেদের সেনাবাহিনী নৌ বাহিনী বিমান বাহিনী পুলিশ বিজিবি ও অন্যান্য সরকারী ভালো পদে চাকুরী হয় না।
কারন ওরা ত টাকা দিতে পারবে না। দলীয় ছাত্র লীগের ছেলেদের নিকট টাকা চাইতেও পারে না; যদি আবার নেত্রীকে বলে দেয় বা জানিয়ে দেয়। তাই গোপনে আওয়ামী লীগের নেত্রীর বিশ্বাসী নেতাগন গোপনে চাকুরী প্রদান করে, স্কুল কলেজ বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ে ছাত্র ছাত্রীদের ভর্তির সুপারিশ ও তদবীর করে জামাত বি এন পির ছেলে মেয়েদের । কারন টাকা পাওয়া যাবে।
উত্তরা ও এয়ারপোর্ট থানা এলাকায় আমার বাস। আমার জানা মতে ঠিক আমারই মত ত্যাগি জীবনবাজী রেখে নৌকার জন্য ভোট সংগ্রহ কারীর একটি মেয়েকে বঙ্গ মাতা স্কুলে ভর্তির জন্য কি না করেছে? মায়া ভাই পর্যন্ত বিষয়টি জানতেন। সে মেয়েটি সুযোগ পায়নি; দেখা গেছে-ঢাকা এয়ারপোর্ট ও বিমানে চাকুরীরত জামাত বি এন পির ছেলে মেয়েরা অজানা রহস্যের কারনে সবাই সুযোগ পেয়ে গিয়েছে।
এর নাম স্বাধীনতা ? মুক্তিযুদ্ধ ? আওয়ামী লীগ ? এত সে বঙ্গবন্ধুর নৌকা ডুবানোর দুরদন্ত শয়তানী মাঝি খন্দকার মোস্তাক আহমেদ, শাহ মোয়াজ্জেম হোসেন, চাষী মাহবুবুল আলম, নূরুল ইসলাম, কে এম ওবায়দুর রহমান তাহের উদ্দিন ঠাকুরদের চেয়ে একটূ কম নয়। আমিই হলাম বাঙ্গালী জাতির মধ্যে সবচেয়ে কুলাঙ্গার। ধিক্রিত অবহেলিত লাঞ্ছিত মূর্খ বেয়াকুপ বেয়াক্কেল আহাম্মদ বোকা গাধা । না পারলাম প্রাণ খুলে হাসতে না পারলাম দুটি কন্যা সন্তানকে প্রাণ খুলে হাসতে। কি লাভ হল? এ স্বাধীনতায়? যে স্বাধীনতা আমার অস্তিত্বকে স্বীকৃতি দেয় না; সে স্বাধীনতাকে আমি কেন স্বীকৃতি দেব? রাষ্ট্রই যদি আমাকে নাগরিক হিসেবে স্বীকৃতি না দেয়, আমি কেন রাষ্ট্র হিসেবে স্বীকৃতি দেবো? কেউ দেবে না। এটাই নিয়ম, এটাই লজিক। জানি আমি এতে হবো রাষ্ট্রদ্রোহী। তাও মন্দ কী? একটা কিছু ত হবো? আওয়ামী লীগের একজন মন্ত্রী একজন মুক্তিযোদ্ধাকে ঘাড় ধরে বেড় করে দেয়?? এ স্বাধীনতার অর্থ কী? কেন পেলাম? কি আশায় স্বাধীন হলাম? কিসের নেশায় নৌকা নৌকা মুজিব মুজিব করে জীবনের শেষ অবস্থানটুকুকে ধূলিসাৎ করে দিয়ে নির্বাসিত হলাম এই দ্বীপ রাজ্য মালদ্বীপে । ভুল কোথায়? ভুল তো আছেই হয়তো জানিনা জীবনের কোথায় কোন সিদ্ধান্তে বড় রকমের ভুল ছিল। তাই ভুলের মাশুল দিয়ে গেলাম ৬৫ বছর বয়সের মুক্তিযোদ্ধা মোকতেল হোসেন মুক্তি।


ভুল তথ্য দিচ্ছেন। এর সমাধান চাই। এর একটি পরিস্কার ব্যাখ্যা চাই; সত্যের জয় হবে; তাই চাই; জাতিরজনকের নাম ভাঙ্গিয়ে কেউ ক্ষমতায় থেকে বঙ্গবন্ধুর সৈনিকদের নিয়ে রঙ তামাশা করবে; মুক্তিযোদ্ধা নির্ধারণের নামে ব্যবসা করবে, এর জন্য যুদ্ধে যাইনি, এর জন্য ৩০ লক্ষ বাঙ্গালী শহীদ হয়নি; এর জন্য ২ লক্ষ ৪০ হাজার মা বোনের ইজ্জত হারায়নি। আসল মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের তালিকাই করতে ব্যর্থ মোজাম্মেল হক।
এই মিথ্যাচারের জন্য আল্লাহ্‌ বিচার করবেন রোজ হাসরের দিন। মহান আল্লাহর বিচারে কারো হাত নেই। আল্লাহর উপরে কোন মন্ত্রী নেই; আল্লাহর উপরে বিচারক নেই; রোজ হাসরের থেকে শক্তিশালী ক্ষমতাবান কোন আদালত নেই। বহু আসল মুক্তিযোদ্ধা এখনো তালিকার বাইরে এবং এ সমস্যা আগামী ১০০ বছরেও কোন সরকার সমাধান করতে পারবে না। ভুয়া মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের কথা রেকর্ড হবে ।
মন্ত্রী নিজেও জানে না যে উপজেলা জেলা গুলোতে এই তালিকা নিয়ে কি পরিমান টাকার ছাড়াছড়ি চলছে? কি পরিমান ব্যবসা করছে নব্য থানা কমান্ডারগণ। এমন কোন উপজেলা নেই যেখানে সত্যকারের মুক্তিযোদ্ধা বাদ পড়ে নাই এবং ভূয়া মিথ্যা তথ্য প্রদানকারী মন্ত্রীর ক্ষমতা বলে নয়তো এম পির ক্ষমতা বলে অথবা উপজেলা নির্বাহী কর্মকর্তার ক্ষমতা বলে নতুন তালিকায় নাম লিখিয়েছে। এমন প্রমান আমার গ্রামে আমার ইউনিয়নে রয়েছে। আমি ত অন্যের ক্কথা শূনে এ সব লিখিনি ভাই।ফুরিয়ে যাচ্ছে ৭১ এর সোনার ছেলে মেয়েরা, বেচে থাকবে শুধু ৭১ এ জন্ম নেয়া নব্য মুক্তিযোদ্ধারা, যারা লক্ষ টাকায় মুক্তিযুদ্ধের সনদ কিনে মুক্তিযোদ্ধা হয়েছে। আমরা মুজিবনগরে (ভারতে) প্রশিক্ষণপ্রাপ্ত মুক্তিযোদ্ধা এর চেয়ে বড় পরিচয়ের প্রয়োজন আছে বলে মনে করি না। মাননীয় প্রধান মন্ত্রীর বিশেষ সহকারী ডঃ আব্দুস সোবহান গোলাপ ভারতের চাদপাড়া এবং পরবর্তীতে ব্যারাকপুর মুক্তিযোদ্ধা প্রশিক্ষণ শিবিরে প্রশিক্ষণ নেয়া মুক্তিযোদ্ধা এবং আমরাও একই সময়ে একই শিবিরে একই কমান্ডারের অধীন প্রশিক্ষণ নেয়া মুক্তিযোদ্ধা। ডঃ আব্দুস সোবহান গোলাপের নাম যদি মুক্তিযোদ্ধা সংসদের তালিকায় থাকতে পারে, তবে আমাদের নাম থাকবে না কেন? শুধু আমরা নই, সারা বাংলাদেশে বহু অখ্যাত অপরিচিত অশিক্ষিত অজো পাড়া গায়ে ছড়িয়ে ছিটিয়ে থাকা বহু প্রকৃত মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের নাম এখনো তালিকাভুক্ত হয়নি। বহু মুক্তিযোদ্ধা ইতোমধ্যেই পরলোকগমন করেছেন, কোন স্বীকৃতি ও সুযোগ সুবিধা ভোগ না করেই তারা চলে গেছেন বাঙ্গালী জাতিকে মহান স্বাধীনতা প্রদান করে। তাদের নাম কে তালিকাভুক্ত করবে? কেন একটি সঠিক তদন্ত কমিটি কর্তৃক সারা দেশে মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের তালিকা করা হয়নি? এ প্রশ্ন সরকার ও দেশবাসীর কাছে। আমরা মনে করি মহান মুক্তিযুদ্ধের নেত্রিত্বদানকারী দল হিসেবে জাতিরজনক বংগবন্ধু কন্যা শেখ হাসিনার সরকারের এ মহান দায়িত্ব মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের জীবদ্ধশায় সম্পন্ন করা উচিত। সবাই শেয়ার করুন, মুক্তিযোদ্ধাদের প্রতি সত্যিকারে শ্রদ্ধা থাকে।
আমার সার্টিফিকেট দরকার নাই। কোন ভাতার দরকার নাই। আপনি মুসলমান দাবী করলে আমি কেন করবো না? আমিও তো  নামাজ পড়ি? মন্ত্রী আমাকে অপমান করতে পারে না। তার চেয়ে আওয়ামী লীগের জন্য আমার অবদান সেই ৬৯ থেকে অদ্যাবধি তিল পরিমান কম নয়; বঙ্গবন্ধু আমাকে চাকুরী দিয়েছিলেন সচিবালয়ে মুক্তিযোদ্ধা হিসেবে। অমুক্তিযোদ্ধা ভাতা পায় এবং তা আওয়ামী লীগের আমলে এবং আওয়ামী লীগের মন্ত্রীর স্বাক্ষরে কেন? আমার কি ইচ্ছে করে না যে আমার সন্তান মুক্তিযোদ্ধার সন্তান হিসেবে বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ে ভর্তি হোক। আমার সন্তানের কি ইচ্ছে করে না, তার বাবা মুক্কতিযোদ্ধা এ কথা অন্য দশজনের নিকট বলে গৌরব বোধ করতে? মন্ত্রীর ইচ্ছে মত চলতে পারে না; এ সব তথ্য নেত্রীর জানা দরকার।
নিবেদক - মোকতেল হোসেন মুক্তি, কন্ঠশিল্পী মুক্তিযোদ্ধা,
প্রতিষ্ঠাতা সভাপতি, সময়৭১।
মালদ্বীপ আওয়ামী লীগ
বঙ্গবন্ধু পরিষদ, মালদ্বীপ শাখা
সাধারণ সম্পাদক
মালদ্বীপস্থ প্রবাসী বাংলাদেশী কমিউনিটি এসোসিয়েশন
সুরকার গীতিকার ও সঙ্গীত পরিচালক
সঙ্গীত শিক্ষক
জয় বাংলা জয় বঙ্গবন্ধু ।

War Criminal Lt Gen Amir Abdullah Khan Niazi of Pakistan

A research body in Bangladesh, tracking those who worked against the country’s freedom movement and killed unarmed civilians at the behest of the then Pakistan regime in 1971, has unveiled a list of what it calls “war criminals”. The list includes several top Bangladeshi politicians and Pakistani military officers.

The list, along with documents and witnesses, buttresses the ongoing demand for “trial for war crimes” for which the current caretaker government ruling the country last week approached the United Nations.

War Crimes Facts Finding Committee (WCFFC) Thursday released a list of 1,597 war criminals responsible for the mass killings, rapes and other atrocities during the Liberation War.

The Pakistani regime of military ruler Gen Yahya Khan ordered a crackdown in the then East Pakistan after elections gave winners of the east wing a majority. Atrocities were carried out between March and December 1971.

Of those on the list, 369 are members of Pakistan military and 1,238 are their local collaborators including members of Razakar and Al Badr (forces formed to aid the Pakistani authorities) and Peace Committee.

The list was not complete and more names would come with more evidence and documents, the committee told media Thursday, The Daily Star reported.

The list and evidence would be handed to the government and Election Commission to help them try the war criminals and disqualify them from elections. Besides, those would be circulated to the international community.

Four women who were tortured by the Pakistan forces were present.

While many have died in the 37 years that have elapsed, Bangladeshi ‘collaborators’ on the list and still alive mostly belong to Jamaat-e-Islami.

Some of them who were then involved in Muslim League and Nezam-e-Islam parties and are now leaders of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jatiya Party, that have ruled the country at different times.

Despite the time-gap, the list reads like the who’s who in the present-day Bangladesh.

Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI)’s former Ameer (chief) Golam Azam, the present chief Matiur Rahman Nizami and secretary general Ali Ahsan Muhammad Mojahid figure on the list.

Both Nizami and Mojahid were ministers in the government of Khaleda Zia (2001-06).

Others on the list, now JeI leaders, are assistant secretaries General Muhammad Kamaruzzaman and A.K.M. Yusuf. Central committee members Delawar Hussain Sayedee, Abdus Sobhan, Abul Kalam Muhammad Yusuf and Abdul Quader Molla are among the high-profile Jamaat leaders on the list.

Former BNP lawmakers Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury and Abdul Alim, and Anwar Zahid, a former minister during military ruler H.M. Ershad rule (1982-90), are also on the list that contains division- and thana-wise (police station) names of Razakar, Al Badr, and Peace Committee members.

“We have drawn up the list on the basis of field-level investigation, statements of eyewitnesses and victims, and examination of relevant documents for 17 long years,” said M.A. Hasan, convener of the committee dedicated to research on acts of genocide and atrocities committed in 1971.

He said they are ready to place all the necessary evidence and documents once the government forms a special tribunal to try the war criminals.

“We have prepared the list not to take revenge but to break the silence of impunity,” said Hasan.

Several Pakistanis figure on the list, many of whom are dead. They include the then military ruler, Gen A.M. Yahya Khan, Lt Gen Tikka Khan, who went on to become the Pakistan Army chief, governor and martial law administrator of the then East Pakistan, Maj Gen Khadim Hussain Raja, general officer commanding (GOC) of the then East Pakistan, Maj Gen Rao Forman Ali, adviser to governor of the then East Pakistan, Gen Abdul Hamid Khan, the then chief of staff of Pakistan army, Maj Gen A.O. Mittha Khan, Gen S.G.M. Pirjadah, Gen Iftekhar Janjua, Brig Jahanjeb Arbab and Lt Gen Amir Abdullah Khan Niazi, the then commander of Eastern Command, are among the Pakistan military personnel listed as war criminals. None of them are in service now.

Niazi surrendered with 93,000 soldiers, ending the war that made Bangladesh free.

 

See also: Evolution of Pakistan Eastern Command plan and Instrument of Surrender (1971)

Following the resignation of Vice-Admiral Syed Mohammad Ahsan on 7 March 1971, as the Unified Commander of Eastern Military High Command and Martial Law Administrator, the General Yahya Khan's military government was unable to find an active duty officer who was willing to take this task. During this 9 month period, several officers assumed the command but was repeatedly removed as they were brutally failed to restore the order. And, many other high and senior officers of Pakistan Armed Forces were cautious on the posting and none of the senior officers were willing to take the charge of the East Pakistan. Meanwhile, on December 14, General Niazi himself volunteered for the job of Martial Law Administrator of East Pakistan. General Yahya Khan immediately made him as the Martial Law Administrator of East Pakistan and the Unified Commander of the Eastern Military High Command. General Yahya Khan sent him a telegram message stating, "You have fought a heroic battle against overwhelming odds. The nation is proud of you …You have now reached a stage where further resistance is no longer humanly possible nor will it serve any useful purpose… You should now take all necessary measures to stop the fighting and preserve the lives of armed forces personnel, all those from West Pakistan and all loyal elements".

The situation in East-Pakistan was extremely difficult, as Bengali forces in the Pakistani Army had gone into mutiny, large segments of the population were hostile, and an independence movement was gaining steam among the Bengalis. Despite this, Niazi and Mohammad Shariff were able to reaffirm Pakistan's control over wide parts of East Pakistan territory, opening the window for a political solution to the turmoil - this would not come to fruition.

Pakistani Army Commander in the Eastern Command, Lt. General A. A. K. Niazi, signing the Instrument of Surrender in front of General of Officer Commanding in Chief of India and Bangladesh Forces in the Eastern Theatre, Lt. General Jagjit Singh Aurora. 16th December, 1971

However, on December 16 of 1971, East-Pakistan Intelligence Directorate (EPID) learned the Indo-Bengali siege of Dhaka. Niazi appealed for a cease-fire but Sam Manekshaw set the deadline for the surrender. Failing to surrender on time, a siege on Dhaka will take place. Not wanting to deterioration of the city, General Niazi signed an instrument of surrender with his counterpart Lieutenant-General Jagjit Singh Aurora, General Officer Commanding-in-chief of Eastern Command of the Indian Army. The meeting was set at Ramna Race Course in Dhaka at 16:31 IST on 16 December 1971, and General Niazi surrendered the Eastern Military High Command's nearly 93,000 personnel to the hands of India.

Aftermath: Revelation

It was only after returning to Pakistan as empty-handed prisoner of war did Niazi criticize Tikka and Rao Farman. Niazi himself admitted that he raised the Razakar forces, who were employed against the Mukti Bahini (guerilla forces) and were used to kill, terrorize people and destroy rural villages. His vows against the Indian Army and Mukti Bahini were notorious. The crackdown against the Bengalis had gone too far, and the result saw Pakistan Combatant forces involved in a guerrilla war with the Bengali Mukti Bahini, under C-in-C General Osmany, Bangladesh Forces. The Pakistan Combatant Forces were unprepared and untrained for such warfare. After a preemptive strike on the Indian territories in the western front, a full-scale invasion of East Pakistan by India resulted in isolation for Niazi's and Shariff's forces being ambushed by the Mukti Bahini, and with the absence of external aid, eventual surrender.

Daughter of Democracy Sheikh Hasina

Honorable Prime Minister of Peoples' Republic of Bangladesh Her Excellency Sheikh Hasina Wajed

SHEIKH HASINA, Prime Minister of Bangladesh, was born on 28 September, 1947 at Tungipara under Gopalganj district. She is the eldest of five children of the Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founder of independent Bangladesh. She graduated from the University of Dhaka in 1973. She was elected Vice President of the Students Union of Government Intermediate Girl’s College. She was a member of the students League Unit of Dhaka University and Secretary of the Students League Unit of Rokeya Hall. She actively participated in all the mass movements since her student life.

            Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman along with the members of his family was martyred on the fateful night of 15 August 1975. Sheikh Hasina and her younger sister Sheikh Rehana were the only survivors as they were in West Germany at that time. Later she went to the United Kingdom from where she started her movement against the autocratic rule in 1980. Sheikh Hasina was unanimously elected President of Bangladesh Awami League in 1981 in her absence, while she was forced to live in exile in New Delhi. Ending six years in exile, she returned home finally on 17 May 1981.

         In the parliamentary election held in 1986, she won three seats. She was elected Leader of the Opposition. She led the historic mass movement in 1990 and announced the constitutional formula for peaceful transfer of power through Articles 51 and 56 of the Constitution.

         Following the election of 1991 Sheikh Hasina became Leader of the Opposition in the country’s Fifth Parliament, She steered all the political parties in the parliament towards changing the Presidential system into the Parliamentary one.

         Sheikh Hasina created awareness among the people and waged a struggle for Non-party Caretaker Government to ensure free and fair polls. Her movement reached the peak after a non-cooperation movement in March 1996 and the provision for Non-party Caretaker Government was incorporated in the Constitution.

        At the call of Sheikh Hasina a large number of people of all walks of life expressed solidarity with the movement at the ‘Janatar Mancha’. In the Parliamentary election held on 12 June 1996, Bangladesh Awami League emerged as the majority party and she assumed the office of the Prime Minister of Bangladesh on 23 June 1996.
After becoming the Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina adopted a number of pragmatic policies for overall development of the nation including poverty alleviation. During the last four years her government achieved laudable success including signing of the historic 30 year Ganges Water Sharing Treaty with India, signing of historic peace Accord on Chittagong Hill Tracts and inauguration of the Bangabandhu Bridge on the river Jamuna.

Sheikh Hasina was conferred Degree of Doctor of Law by the Boston University of the USA on 6 February 1997 and Honorary Doctor of Law by the Waseda University of Japan on 4 July 1997. She was also conferred the Honorary Doctorate of Philosophy in Liberal Arts by University of Abertay Dundee of the United Kingdom on 25 October, 1997. She was conferred Honorary Degree of Desikottama (Doctor of Literature, honoris causa) by Visva-Bharati University of West Bengal, India on 28 January 1999. She was also conferred the degree of Doctor of Laws, honoris causa, on the ground of her distinguished creative contributions in the service of society by the Australian National University on 20 October 1999. Dhaka University conferred Honorary 'Doctor of Laws' degree to Sheikh Hasina on 18 December, 1999 for her outstanding contribution towards peace and democracy. The World famous Catholic University of Brussels, Belgium conferred Honorary Doctorate degree (Doctor Honoris Causa) on Sheikh Hasina on 04 February, 2000 for her decisive role in establishing democracy, protecting human rights and peace. Sheikh Hasina has been conferred Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters by the Bridgeport University, USA on 5 September, 2000. Sheikh Hasina has been awarded UNESCO's Houphouet-Boigny Peace Prize for 1998 for her remarkable contribution to bringing peace through ending the 25 years of conflict in Chittagong Hill Tracts with political courage and statesmanship.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina received prestigious Pearl S. Buck Award '99 on 9 April 2000 in recognition of her vision, courage, achievements in political, economic and humanitarian fields by Randolph Macon Women's College of USA. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has been awarded the prestigious CERES' medal to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in recognition to her fight against hunger on 02 August, 1999. The All India Peace Council awarded her 'Mother Teresa Award' in 1998. The Mahatma M K Gandhi Foundation of Oslo, Norway awarded Sheikh Hasina ‘M K Gandhi Award’ for 1998 for her contribution towards promotion of communal understanding, non violent religions harmony and growth of democracy at the level of grassroots in Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina was named Paul Haris Fellow by the Rotary Foundation of Rotary International. She was also given Medal of Distinction in 1996-97 and 1998-99 and Head of State Medal in 1996-97 by the International Association of Lions Clubs.         She has authored several books including "Why Are They Street Children", "The Origin of Autocracy", 'Miles to Go", "Elimination of Poverty and Some Thoughts", "People and Democracy", "My Dream My Struggle" and "Development for the Masses." She performed holy Hajj and Umrah several times.         Sheikh Hasina is the Chairperson of "The Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Memorial Trust". She has been helping a lot of poor boys and girls for their education.         Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, throughout her life has been a strong proponent of peace, freedom and democracy. From an early age, inspired by the lofty ideals and love for the people of her father, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the liberator of Bangladesh, she developed a strong sense of identity for the common people. She always spoke out against oppression and violation of human rights. This commitment has hardened over the years, particularly when her parents, brothers and scores of relatives were brutally assassinated by the misguided members of the military in 1975 soon after the independence of Bangladesh.        Since that time her resolve for democracy and development for the teeming millions of Bangladesh has become firmly entrenched. She struggled for the return of democracy in Bangladesh and fought valiantly for its establishment in the country in every possible manner. She was committed to making Parliament the centre of all national activities.         In 1996, the people of Bangladesh gave her a strong mandate as the Prime Minister of the country. Despite serious resource and constraints and recurrent natural calamity as well as widespread poverty, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, during the first two years of her government, has lived up to her unswerving commitment to the cause of peace, democracy, development and human rights.        Her first act of peace within months of her assumption of office was the initiative for resolution of the long-standing water-sharing dispute with India through a 30-years treaty. This put an end to a very complex regional dispute.        Her visionary idea of a business summit among the political and private sector leaders of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan has added a new chapter in the history of South Asia.

         Her dedicated leadership also made possible a peace agreement in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, thereby solving the 23-year old insurgency in the Hill districts of Bangladesh. This peace accord brought an area inhabited by nearly 5 million people out of violence and into a time of peace and development. Though the international media has not given much prominence to this accord, it is uniquely remarkable because the peace accord benefited such a large number of people and the whole area has been brought under development programs following the complete surrender of arms by the insurgents.

         Her quest for peace has taken her to India and Pakistan to talk to the leaders of these two countries soon after the nuclear test urging reduction of tension in the region.

         Prime Minister Hasina has been a strong advocate for the Culture of Peace at global, regional and national levels. In many major conferences, she espoused the concept of the Culture of Peace, most recently in South Africa at the 12th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) which has a membership of 114 countries. Her initiative has resulted in the first-ever resolution by the Plenary of the United Nations General Assembly on the Culture of Peace. She also provided leadership for the declaration by the UN of the period 2001 to 2010 as the International Decade for Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World.

         Prime Minister Hasina’s determination for the eradication of poverty, in particular through wide-ranging microcredit programmes, has been recognized world-wide. Her co-chairpersonship of the Microcredit Summit in February 1997 which resolved to bring 100 million families of the world out of poverty by 2005 focused world attention to her strong commitment to the eradication of poverty and enlistment of the poorest of the poor. She has been a champion of microcredit by spreading the message in major international forums. Her leadership led to the adoption for the first time by UN General Assembly a far-reaching resolution on the role of microcredit in the eradication of poverty.
         Along with poverty eradication, she has focused on the empowerment of women and has successfully completed legislation to ensure adequate representation of women in the local government bodies, leading to the election of more than 14,000 women to these bodies in 1997. She has taken major initiatives to stop violence against women and children.
        She has also provided leadership in the field of education, particularly for the education of girls in her own country as well as advocating it for global support. Her government has greatly enhanced budgetary allocation for primary education focusing on girls’ education.

         To improve the quality of life of the people of Bangladesh, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has particularly focused on human development, paying special attention to healthcare, family planning, nutrition, women’s rights and survival and development of children. At the UN and other forums, she has been a major voice in support of the cause of children and their rights.

        Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has, all along her life, defended human rights in every possible way. Her active promotion of the rights of women and children has drawn appreciation by both government and NGOs as well as international organizations. She has promoted the right to development as having centrality in the human rights regime. At the NAM Summit in South Africa in 1998, her proposal for a Convention on the Right to Development received welcoming endorsement of the Heads of State and Government. She initiated the establishment of a National Human Rights Commission and the office of Ombudsperson as well as Bangladesh’s recent accession to six major human rights instruments including the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

         Her keen interest resulted in the signature by Bangladesh of the Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC) and ratification of the Landmines Treaty, being the first country in South Asia to do so.

         Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s initiative resulted in the hosting of the first-ever conference of the Asian parliamentarians devoted to peace and cooperation in Dhaka in September 1999 which elected her as the first President of the Association of Asian Parliaments for peace established at the conference.

         At present, as someone who has lost so much personally and has been a victim of oppression and denial of freedom, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina stands out as a messenger of peace, democracy, development and human rights. Her leadership of the eighth largest country of the world manifests her concern for the people, seen again during the worst-ever floods in Bangladesh in 1998.

 §    Sheikh Hasina is the recipient of the UNESCO Houphouet-Boigny Peace Prize for 1998 for her role in bringing peace in the Chittagong Hill Tracts region of Bangladesh.

§    Sheikh Hasina has been awarded the Mahatma Gandhi Award for 1998 (Oslo, Norway) for her contribution towards promotion of communal understanding, non-violence, religious harmony and growth of grassroots democracy in Bangladesh.

§    She has been awarded 1999 CERES Medal for contribution to the agriculture development by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

§    She is the winner of the 1999 Pearl S. Buck Award for "your vision, your courage and your achievements in political, economic and humanitarian spheres capture the spirit of the award and of the woman who inspired it."

§    She has been awarded honorary Doctor of Liberal Arts by the University of Alberta Dundee in the United Kingdom in October 1997.

§    She has been conferred honorary Doctor of Laws by the Boston University in the United States and the Waseda University of Japan.

§    She has been conferred the degree of Desikottama (Doctor of Literature) by the Visva-Bharati University, India founded by Nobel Laureate Rabindranath Tagore.

§    She has been conferred honorary Doctor of Laws by the Australian National University in October 1999.

§    Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has been conferred honorary Doctor of Laws by Dhaka University in December 1999.

§    She has been conferred honorary Doctor of Laws by the Catholic University of Brussels in February 2000.

§    Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has been conferred by the honorary Doctor of Humane Letters for her contribution to world peace and development by the University of Bridgeport, Connecticut in the United States on 5 September 2000.

         Under her leadership her party Bangladesh Awami League led grand alliance to win a landslide victory in the 9th Parliament Election on December 29, 2008 with 262 seats out of 299 in the National Parliament.

         Sheikh Hasina took oath as Prime Minister of Bangladesh at a ceremony held at Banghabhaban on January 06, 2009.

        Sheikh Hasina is married having one son and one daughter.

The Politics of 1971 By Afsan Choudhury

The politics of 1971

Afsan Choudhury

makes the case that parties opposed to the Liberation War have no place in independent Bangladesh

In Bangladesh, history has become party politics. The source of this attitude may be in the nature of the political leadership that we have had since 1972 who feel anything is justified if it leads to political power.

Of the three main politically contesting histories, each party now has its own version. It means the AL, the BNP, and now the Jamaat version of 1971.

We, in general, also refuse to contest obvious factual oddities and occasional absurdities because we are afraid that our national consciousness may be challenged by what is found. In the last 40 years we have lost our confidence to face history.

Given such weak nerves and even weaker intellectual muscles, how can people expect to cope with the demands of history, both in writing and practice? The failure to write a credible history of 1971 has allowed parties who opposed the birth of Bangladesh to control the political destiny of the country. The case of Jamaat-e-Islami is a typical one of inadequate academic history writing becoming a political problem.

Civil war and other wars?

Whether it is the Indian historian Sarmila Basu or a Jamaat or any other pseudo-Islamic extremist cadre, 1971 is usually a "civil war." The argument is, Pakistan was one country and both were warring sides on a shared soil. Another argument is that the war was between 1ndia and Pakistan, and Bangladesh was a hyphenated part of history, a sub-text. Even Benazir Bhutto while talking to us -- Mohiuddin Ahmed, Muntasir Mamoon and I when we visited Pakistan -- called the Bangladeshis partisans "Indian supporters" or perhaps something more.

The civil war argument doesn't work because Bangladesh's Independence Day was March 26, 1971. Bangladesh came into being as a state on that day and the Pakistani forces became an occupation army. So the question of civil war doesn't arise: it was a war between two states, one occupying another.

Pakistanis may claim that this was a civil war but it is neither logical nor can be proven in law. The "civil war" argument applies only if people refuse to accept March 26, 1971 as the day of Bangladeshi independence. Those in Bangladesh denying this are denying the fact of Bangladesh coming into being. Maybe this argument can be made in Pakistan, logical or not. In that case, one may also argue that those who wish to argue the Pakistan way may go there.

Indo-Pak war or Bangla-Pak war?

Another argument is that it was an Indo-Pak war and so all were part of one mega-war. This argument arises from a lack of knowledge of the events, and not just of this war but any war.

Rarely, if ever, is a singular war fought. In the case of 1971, several wars were being fought, but the primary war was fought between Pakistani and Bangladeshi forces. It is not "patriotism" to say so -- but all wars flowed from this war. This war was followed by other wars, including the Indo-Pak war which was the by-product of the Bangla-Pak war. It couldn't have arisen without the event of March 26, so everything that happened after March 26 was contingent to this principal war.

There were several subsidiary wars going on within all the sides. Bangladesh forces also fought the Maoists, who were also fighting two wars, one against Pakistan and another against the Awami League. There were internal wars happening, like the factional wars within AL leadership and India, which had its roots in Cold War Politics. There was conflict between India and Bangladesh, part of which was manifested by the raising of the Mujib Bahini manned by Bangladeshis, but controlled by Indian military. Many Mujib Bahini members even fought with the general Mukti Bahini members as well.

The US and the USSR were opponents as well and both worried that they would be dragged into a wider South Asian war. In the final days, they even had a show of armed fleets in the Indian Ocean. The ethnic militant groups of North-East India fought the central Indians because of their own nationalism. The ethnic minorities of Bangladesh fought their war with Pakistan, the repressive state, although they were outside the Bengali nationalist movement which spawned the war.

In other words, there were many wars, but the principal war was the Bangladesh-Pakistan war. It was also the first war. Every war and conflict that occurred in that time period was "subsidiary," or a result of that war. This war was between two states, Pakistan and Bangladesh, which became a state on March 26, 1971 and was occupied by Pakistan till December 16 of that year. This, in a nutshell, is the history of 1971.

There is no scope for calling this a civil war, nor for locating the Bangladesh war within the Indo-Pak war, even if the forces of some parties were much bigger. Size has nothing to do with facts.

Social collaboration: Impact, action, and consequence.

Those who were with the forces supporting Pakistan army were enemies of the Bangladesh state. How does one identify them?

Pakistan set up "Peace Committees" all over the country to help fight the Bangladesh forces that they called "miscreants." From the village level to the national level, these committees represented the spirit and will of the Pakistan state. Anyone who was a member swore allegiance to Pakistan and promised to do everything to sustain the state. Similarly, the Razakar Bahini was also set up to counter the Mukti Bahini and help the Pakistan army reach into the deep of Bangladesh.

Although today the term Razakar has become generic term meaning "traitor," in 1971 it was a job analogous to that of the Ansars of today. Most of the people who joined came from the poorest class and looked upon being a razakar as a job which apart from a salary also allowed them to loot and steal with impunity. Several historians have noted that most of these razakars were not ideological at all, and most joined as an economic and not an ideological choice.

Razakars were also the largest band of organised criminals in 1971. In areas where they were active, public hatred towards them was very high. In most cases, in most villages, most razakars were dealt violent justice, from lynching to head shaving to beating, etc after the war was over. In case where rapes were reported, the punishment was expectedly severe.

However, in many cases, the Razakars also supported the Muktis in lieu of money, because they were rarely if ever ideological. They were criminalised by war, but were not supporters of Pakistan, though their actions were in compliance with the objective that Pakistan had adopted.

The rural Peace Committees were manned by people who were village-centric conservatives, often more interested in controlling the village than fighting the war. This control had been upset after the nationalist movement peaked and Sangram Committees were formed, which were mostly led by AL partisans. So while the village Shanti Committees were mostly opposed to the Sangram Committees, they were half supporters of Pakistan at best, and were more part of village politics. Many actively supported the Pak army and Razakar actions. Support to the Bangladesh forces was also there because the village fighters mostly came from the same rural elite.

In all cases, the members of the political parties supporting Pakistan lent a violent hand, and these were people who didn't need to be coaxed into supporting or opposing. They did it by choice and they belonged to the parties who were defeated in the 1970 elections, the traditional cross-Pakistan parties like JI, ML, PDP, etc

Both the Shanti Committees and the Razakars were in the end located within the Pakistani defensive strategy applied to an occupied land. All those who supported Pakistan should have been subjected to a review after 1971. Maybe the state did not do or was unable to do so because of compelling pressures. However, at the grassroots level, social scrutiny by the villagers and leaders was made, and in many cases action taken. Even if the central authorities and the national political leadership were unable or unwilling to act against collaborators, many villages did. In many cases, such reviews led to violent acts which are inevitable in such cases.

The Founder of Bangladesh, father of Bengali nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman 

Political collaboration: Who opposed Bangladesh? However, social collaboration is different from political collaboration. While social acts may be sourced in local conditions and not directly linked with state policies, political collaboration is primarily an act of upholding the state. This involves political constructs like parties applying political policies to strengthen the state. The premier instrument of political construction in occupied Bangladesh was the National Peace Committee comprised of various parties that wanted Pakistan to prevail. The political parties who were members of that body were making a political commitment to Pakistan.

The War Criminal of Bangladesh Liberation War 1971

The other source of their commitment to Pakistan was participation in the by-election of 1971. This by-election threw out the results of the 1970 election which was the legal basis of the independence declaration of Bangladesh and legitimacy of all acts thereafter. Those who became members of the National Peace Committee and participated in the elections acted against Bangladesh state in strengthening the state of Pakistan. On that ground, all the parties and all the people involved should be guilty of acting against the state of Bangladesh.

Such people or parties should not be part of the political structure of a state whose inception they opposed and who even supported the actions of a military force to kill that state. It is argued that Bangladesh was not fully formed and the forces were "rebel" forces. This point is not valid because that state came into existence on March 26, 1971 and the rebel forces were actually the national force.

It was for this reason that all the opposing parties were banned in 1972 as they were enemies of the state, in the clearest sense of the term. This statement is not an emotional one at all, like those who are feeling enraged at what Jamaat leadership and supporters have said about the 1971 war. It is simply not possible to constitutionally tolerate those who had opposed the circumstances of its coming into being and hope to succeed as a state. Where else are such forces tolerated?

We need facts but do we want to look for them? The issue of war crimes is irrelevant here because that depends on personal liability and specific law, backed by evidence. That may or may not exist because nobody has bothered to collect evidence all these years. Before embarking on another example of a misguided legal attempt, like the effort to strip Gholam Azam of his citizenship, Jamaat and other anti-Bangladesh parties should be banned on the grounds of not having wanted Bangladesh in the first place. They have no legal right to participate in Bangladeshi politics.

The reason they were allowed is because our quality of politics is so bad that our leaders consider allowing anti-Bangladesh parties into politics as a simple way to manage state politics. It could only happen in a state that politically fails almost at inception.

The engine of failure roared loudly when one-party rule was established and gained momentum when the constitutional pillars were taken away and increased even further when one religion was made the state religion. They are indicators of failure, because the constitution was tampered with on grounds of personal or a party political benefit. Maybe the entire leadership associated with such decisions deserve to be tried in a constitutional court.

The case against individual leaders is another matter and its best to set up a committee to peruse and explore existing evidence. It is no use screaming, if nothing can be proven in court; no use saying that three million were killed if there is no credible survey to say how many really died and how.

Had the events around Bangladesh's birth and history turned into a rational discourse and not an issue of religion and taboo, we not only would have known more, but we would not have had the leaders who opposed the birth of Bangladesh flourish in that very country.

It is interesting that Jamaat or Muslim League, which never had a chance in East Pakistan politics from 1947 to 1971, have now shared state power in Bangladesh. We don't mind that, apparently, because our rulers and their parties have violated the constitution so many times in letter and spirit. Within that framework, the Awami League, the BNP, and the Jamaat-e-islami are blood brothers.

Afsan Choudhury is a journalist writing for Bangladeshi and South Asian publications.

The continuing rape of our history

The continuing rape of our history


Mashuqur Rahman demolishes Sarmila Bose's revisionist history of 1971


Genocide denial is a phenomenon that crops up to challenge almost every accepted case of genocide. The genocide committed by the Pakistan army during the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971 is no exception. Because of the scale of the atrocities in 1971 against a civilian population of 70 million people, it has proved impossible for genocide deniers to claim that the atrocities did not occur. Instead, they have focused on two tactics used to deny most genocides: that the magnitude of the killings was not that great, and that the Pakistan army had no systematic policy of genocide.


The grim numbers of 1971: Genocide versus denial
Most estimates of the 1971 genocide put the death toll between 300,000 and 3 million Bangladeshis, with between 200,000 to 400,000 women raped. R.J. Rummel, in his book Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900, puts the death toll at around 1.5 million. Gendercide Watch terms the 1971 genocide as one of the most concentrated acts of genocide in the twentieth century. Susan Brownmiller, in her book Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, puts the number of women raped by the Pakistan military and their local collaborators, the razakars, between 200,000 and 400,000. According to Brownmiller, the Pakistani army raped Bengali girls as young as eight and grandmothers as old as seventy-five.


After the War, the Pakistan government produced a report -- the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report -- on the actions of the Pakistan army in 1971. While the report acknowledged that the Pakistan army had indeed committed atrocities in Bangladesh, it downplayed the extent of the atrocities and denied that there was any systematic policy of genocide. The report put the death toll from the genocide at 26,000, based on "situation reports submitted from time to time by the Eastern Command to the General Headquarters."


The Pakistani report's estimate of 26,000 dead stands in stark contrast to every other estimate of the death toll of between 300,000 to 3 million. The report was an attempt by the Pakistan government to dictate the narrative before the true extent of the genocide became evident to the world. The Pakistani report has, nonetheless, stood as the document of last resort for most 1971 genocide deniers.






Sarmila Bose's (questionable) claims


Following up on her 2005 paper denying the extent of the 1971 genocide, published in the Economic and Political Weekly, Sarmila Bose has now published a paper denying the extent of the rape of Bangladeshi women by the Pakistan army and the razakars. In her paper titled "Losing the Victims: Problems of Using Women as Weapons in Recounting the Bangladesh War," she states:


"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."


At the very beginning of her paper, she lays down the two tactics familiar to all genocide deniers: she questions the extent of the rape and questions whether there was any systematic policy of rape. Ms. Bose argues that claiming "hundreds of thousands" were raped trivialises "the possibly several thousand true rape victims" of the war. She, however, does not offer a good explanation as to how she reached the "several thousand" number, other than saying that so many rapes would not be possible because of the size of the Pakistani army in 1971. She also, unsurprisingly, quotes the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report to support her assertion that so many rapes could not have occurred.


To try to bolster her argument, she claims that the size of the Pakistani army in Bangladesh was only 34,000 men. Then she asserts: "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."


The actual number of Pakistani forces at the end of the war, and taken POW by the Indians, was 90,368, including over 54,000 army and 22,000 paramilitary forces. It is not unreasonable to conclude that a force of 90,000 could rape between 200,000 to 400,000 women in the space of nine months. To rape 200,000 Bangladeshi women a Pakistani force of 90,000 would have to rape 2 to 3 women each in nine months. Not only is this scale of atrocity possible by an army engaged in a systematic campaign of genocide, it also has parallels in other modern conflicts (for example, the rape of between 250,000 to 500,000 women in Rwanda within 100 days).






The Pakistan army: Gentlemen in uniform at a time of war


Ms. Bose also paints a picture of the Pakistan military as a disciplined force that spared women and children. Citing her field research she writes: "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."


However, her field research is contradicted by all available evidence. From the early days of the war, women and girls were targeted for rape and killed. On March 30, 1971, the American Consul General in Dhaka, Archer Blood, sent a telegram to the State Department recounting the Pakistani atrocities in Dhaka. In it he wrote about the massacre at Rokeya Hall at Dhaka University where, according to Blood, the building was "set ablaze and girls machine-gunned as they fled the building."


On March 31, 1971, Archer Blood sent another telegram which recounted atrocities against girls. Blood wrote: "Six naked female bodies at Rokeya Hall, Dacca U. Feet tied together. Bits of rope hanging from ceiling fans. Apparently raped, shot and hung by their heels from fans."


The reports from the American Embassy in Dhaka give us a small window into the systematic killing spree that was Operation Searchlight, the code name the Pakistani army gave to the first stage of the genocide operation.


Throughout her paper, Ms. Bose continues to paint the Pakistan military as a disciplined force not capable of systematic rape. She cited a memo written by General Niazi that reminds his officers that they have a "code of honour" and as "gentlemen and officers" they should abide by it. She then writes that Pakistani officers she spoke to were "indignant" at charges of large-scale rape and claimed that these charges were false.


Ms. Bose follows a similar pattern throughout her paper. She gives credence to the stories told to her by the Pakistani military, the perpetrators of the rapes, and dismisses as "alleged" and not credible the accounts of the rape victims. However, contemporaneous news reports from 1971 tell a different story. For example, an October 25, 1971, a Time Magazine article, detailing the Pakistani military atrocities, reports on women and girls held captive and raped at Pakistani military headquarters in Dhaka:


"One of the more horrible revelations concerns 563 young Bengali women, some only 18, who have been held captive inside Dacca's dingy military cantonment since the first days of the fighting. Seized from Dacca University and private homes and forced into military brothels, the girls are all three to five months pregnant. The army is reported to have enlisted Bengali gynecologists to abort girls held at military installations. But for those at the Dacca cantonment it is too late for abortion. The military has begun freeing the girls a few at a time, still carrying the babies of Pakistani soldiers."


A problematic methodology

Having portrayed the Pakistan military as a benevolent force, Ms. Bose then attempts to discredit a handful of accounts of rape victims as a way of casting doubt on the rapes committed during the 1971 genocide.

She begins by trying to cast doubt on an eyewitness, named Rabeya Khatun, whom she dismisses as illiterate, to rape at Rajarbag. Ms. Bose then dismisses accounts of two other corroborating witnesses because their testimony was similar to Ms. Khatun's and they, too, were illiterate. Ms. Bose declares the witness's testimony not credible because, "the language is not what would be used either by illiterate sweepers or by educated Bengalis in everyday conversation."

She then finds refuge in the account of a Pakistani Lt. Col. Taj who, unsurprisingly, "categorically denied that any molestation of women had taken place at Rajarbag by his men." Ms. Bose then informs us Lt. Col. Taj was not actually present at Rajarbag after the first night of military action. Yet, she felt the need to inject him as a fact witness.

night of military action. Yet, she felt the need to inject him as a fact witness. Then, she dismisses Ms. Khatun's account as "highly dubious," declaring "until and unless other, credible witnesses come forward, the hellish account attributed to one illiterate woman simply will not suffice."

Dismissing witnesses simply on the grounds of illiteracy is a serious methodological fallacy. Eyewitnesses do not need to read or write to know what constitutes sexual violence. The Pakistan military did not discriminate between illiterate and literate classes in its campaign of killings and rape against Bangladeshis.

Ms. Bose then tries to cast doubt on the account of rape victim Ferdousi Priyabhashini, an educated woman and well-known sculptor. Ms. Bose's argument here is somewhat muddled, but it appears that she is claiming that Mrs. Priyabhashini was less of a rape victim and more of a willing participant.

Ms. Bose writes: "It is highly unusual for someone of her background to admit to having been a rape victim, especially in the conservative societies like Bangladesh." Ms. Bose goes on, "According to her own account, in 1971, Ferdousi Priyabhashini was a mature woman, a divorced mother of three, working for many years."

After a muddled discussion of Ms. Priyabhashini's account of rape by Pakistani soldiers, Ms. Bose concludes that there is an "inconsistency" in Ms. Priyabha-shini's account because she feared she would be killed by the freedom fighters. Ms. Bose declares: "Only those who were perceived to have willingly fraternised with the Pakistani regime were at risk of the wrath of freedom fighters, not victims of the regime." It appears Ms. Bose is asserting that since Ms. Priyabhashini feared for her life, she must have consented to having sex with Pakistani soldiers.


In the legal sense, rape is an act of sexual intercourse carried out "against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another." The calculated rationale of the act of war-time rape constitutes a political act, and an attack on the collective political identity of the group of females under attack, not necessarily on their individual identities. Rape during genocides is not exclusively an attack on the body -- it is an attack on the "body politic." Its primary goal is not to maim or kill a person (though that does, in fact, happen, in great numbers) but to control an entire socio-political process by crippling it.


Put another way, during genocides, rape has been used as a weapon of social control and cultural destruction, of devaluation and commodification.


Genocidal rape is not rape out of control, it is rape under control. All existing evidence points to the fact that the Pakistani military specifically targeted Bengali women and girls. This targeting was not a by-product of war, but a systematic campaign of genocidal rape. The historic Akayesu trial in the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda established that rape constitutes an act of genocide, and an egregious violation of international law, when it is committed to destroy a targeted group. Given the scale and systematic way in which Bangladeshi women and girls were subjected to rape and sexual violence in 1971, even a rudimentary understanding of the effect of rape on the victim casts doubt on Ms. Bose's argument.


Ms. Bose goes on to try to cast doubt on the account of Akhtaruzzaman Mandal -- a freedom fighter who accompanied Indian soldiers as they took control of a Pakistani position. There, Mr. Mandal states, he saw the corpse of a Pakistani captain lying beside a dead Bengali woman who showed signs of rape. Mr. Mandal also states that four naked women were discovered locked in a building, and one of the women was six months pregnant. Another 16 women were also discovered locked in an adjacent high school, some showing signs of torture.


In discounting Mr. Mandal's account, Ms. Bose writes that she interviewed Pakistani officers who told her that the dead captain was "humane" and had only recently arrived at the location. She accuses Mr. Mandal of "character assassination of an officer who had died defending his country, and therefore, cannot speak in his own defence."


Ms. Bose, once again, is ready to accept the word of the Pakistani soldiers, the perpetrators of rape. However, there are many cases of rapists in this world who appear to be "humane" to those who know them.


In critiquing accounts of seven rape victims describes in Neelima Ibrahim's book Ami Birangona Bolchhi, Ms. Bose notes that four of the seven women were abducted by Bengalis and one by a Bihari before being handed over to the Pakistan army. Some of the women were raped by their initial abductors before being handed over to the Pakistan army, to be held in barracks and raped again. Ms. Bose neglects to mention that those who abducted the women were local collaborators, razakars, working with the Pakistani military. Nonetheless, she makes the bizarre observation that since the razakars had already raped the women, "for the majority of these women, therefore, even if the Pakistan army had done nothing, they would still be rape victims."


The point, of course, is that the Pakistani army had done something -- they had raped these women. Whether their initial abductors had also raped the women does not make the Pakistani army any less complicit in their rapes.


An apologia

In this latest paper Sarmila Bose tries mightily to diminish the atrocities committed by the Pakistan military in 1971. She, however, offers very little of substance to back up her assertion that the existing research and documentation of the 1971 genocide overestimates the death toll and the rapes. Her claim that, in her words, the "unsubstantiated and implausible" claims of hundreds of thousands of rape victims distracts attention from the "true rape victims" and "insult the true victims by trivialising their suffering" is itself an insult to the victims of rape in Bangladesh. The number of rape victims does not diminish the suffering of any individual rape victim; the vast number of rapes only demonstrates the heinous magnitude of the Pakistani campaign. If there is any insult, it is that there is no acknowledgement of all the victims of the Pakistan army's rapes; rather, there is an attempt to dismiss the experiences of rape victims by asserting that these rapes did not take place.


In her attempt at denial, Sarmila Bose relies on the Pakistan government's report on the atrocities and the accounts of Pakistani soldiers, the perpetrators of the genocide. She overlooks news reports from the time, eyewitness accounts, academic works, and case studies. Instead of addressing the issue of genocidal rape in 1971, Ms. Bose tries to deconstruct and discredit a handful of accounts of rape. She targets personal narratives, such as that of Ms. Priyabhashini's, to try to prove the victims were not raped. She does not engage the issue of the number of rapes in any substantial way, or address how her assertions of "several thousand rapes" can be reconciled with numbers put forward by international agencies or independent reports, nor does she engage the discussion of genocidal rape as a war strategy.


In the end, her paper is neither scholarly nor neutral. It is an apologia for the Pakistan army and for the genocide it perpetrated against the Bangladeshi people in 1971.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:

1. Sarmila Bose's paper: "Losing the Victims: Problems of Using Women as Weapons in Recounting the Bangladesh War" can be found on the Internet at http://www.Epw. Org. in/uploads/articles/11060.pdf

2. An expanded version of this article can be found on the Internet at http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2007/10/10/the-continuing-rape-of-bangladesh.


Artworks by PABLO


Mashuqur Rahman is a US-based member of the Drishtipat Writers' Collective.