In the month of December in the previous year there was a raging debate in the media about the number of people who were killed during our Liberation War. Actually for quite some time certain quarters have been trying to establish that the ‘three million’ figure is a fiction and it is simply impossible to kill so many people in such a short period of time. Well of course there can be academic debate about the number and seeking the truth should always be welcomed. However, there are reasons to believe that, for some people at least seeking the truth is not the goal. The goal is to belittle Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There are those who say that the three million figure is Bangabandhu’s invention and he actually meant three lakhs but said three millions and his supporters tried to establish (with mischievous intentions) the figure as the truth. As a matter of fact, this canard is the worst kind of fiction. Bangabandhu returned to Bangladesh on January 10, 1972 and the three million figure was highlighted by reliable media sources well before that day. When Bangabandhu said “three million of my people were killed” he was not uttering any random number. He was quoting reliable and independent sources. And give me a break. The man graduated in British India. He enrolled at the Islamia College (now Maulana Azad College), a well-respected college affiliated to the University of Calcutta, studied law and graduated in 1947. I believe that you need to have decent grasp of English to do that. It is difficult, at least for this writer, to believe that he would confuse lakhs with millions. I mean it may be possible but seems highly improbable. And he was not really known for making gaffes like this.Bangabandhu: Lies and misconceptions
Well of course there can be academic debate about the number and seeking the truth should always be welcomed. However, there are reasons to believe
that, for some people at least seeking
the truth is not the goal.
SYED MEHDI MOMIN
In the month of December in the previous year there was a raging debate in the media about the number of people who were killed during our Liberation War. Actually for quite some time certain quarters have been trying to establish that the three million figure is a fiction and it is simply impossible to kill so many people in such a short period of time. Well of course there can be academic debate about the number and seeking the truth should always be welcomed. However, there are reasons to believe that, for some people at least seeking the truth is not the goal. The goal is to belittle Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There are those who say that the three million figure is Bangabandhus invention and he actually meant three lakhs but said three millions and his supporters tried to establish (with mischievous intentions) the figure as the truth. As a matter of fact, this canard is the worst kind of fiction. Bangabandhu returned to Bangladesh on January 10, 1972 and the three million figure was highlighted by reliable media sources well before that day. When Bangabandhu said three million of my people were killed he was not uttering any random number. He was quoting reliable and independent sources. And give me a break. The man graduated in British India. He enrolled at the Islamia College (now Maulana Azad College), a well-respected college affiliated to the University of Calcutta, studied law and graduated in 1947. I believe that you need to have decent grasp of English to do that. It is difficult, at least for this writer, to believe that he would confuse lakhs with millions. I mean it may be possible but seems highly improbable. And he was not really known for making gaffes like this.
Let us talk a bit about the sheer brutality of the nine months. Well, most people will agree that the American magazine Time is well-respected. In the 12th April, 1971 issue on a report on the massacre perpetrated by the occupation forces in the early days of the war the report stated, As Round 1 of Pakistans bitter civil war ended last week, the winnerpredictablywas the tough West Pakistan army, which has a powerful force of 80,000 Punjabi and Pathan soldiers on duty in rebellious East Pakistan. Estimates of the total dead ran as high as 300,000.untold thousands perished. Time did not consider the figure of 300,000 as outrageous. And in less than a fortnight after the crackdown.
In a signed editorial under the heading of Hang the Yahya Junta on the 22 December 1971 issue of the Purbadesh, well-known journalist Ehtesham Haider Choudhury claimed that the enemy occupation forces have savagely killed about three million innocent people and more than two hundred intellectuals. I would like to remind the readers again that Bangabandhu returned to Bangladesh 18 days after the article was published. The previous day the same daily printed an eight column red coloured banner heading, asking: How many people of Bengal have been killed? In it Ershad Majumdar, the papers senior reporter, categorically said that everywhere people are asking: How many people of Bangladesh have been killed? How many lakhs (unit of hundred thousand)? 10,20,30,40 or 50 lakhs? No one seems to have the answer. But the people are not likely to leave the question unanswered. Answer we must have.
Around the same time frame Pravda printed a report stating that over three million people have been killed by the Pakistan Army. Again, at that time Bangabandhu was in jail in Pakistan.
On a different but related note I would like to ask those who believe that it is simply impossible to kill so many people in less than nine months to do some simple arithmetic. In 1981, UNs declaration of Universal Human Rights writes; Among the genocides of human history, the highest number of people killed in the lowest span of time in Bangladesh in 1971. On an average of 6,000 (six thousand) to 12, 000 (twelve thousand) people were killed every single day..........This is the highest daily average in the history of genocides. The occupation army of Pakistan committed this holy act for around 260 days (from the night of 25 March,1971 to their surrender on the 16th. December, 1971). Using UNs figures simply multiply them with 260 days. What figures do we get? Please take a calculator and check this out. Does the figure three million so incredible?
I do admit all these do not prove scientifically beyond any reasonable doubt that the three million number is absolutely correct. However, I believe we have managed to establish that the three million figure was not a random number that Bangabandhu just blurted out.
Myths and misconceptions abound about the Father of the Nation.
There is even now widespread belief that Bangabandhu issued a blanket pardon for all collaborators or war criminals. Not true. The so-called general amnesty was promulgated on November 30, 1973. The amnesty declared by the administration of Bangabandhu exempted all who were accused, and/or sentenced, under the Collaborators Act except those who were accused, and/or sentenced, for committing rape, arson and premeditated murders. Thus, the declaration of amnesty exempted, very categorically, the persons accused, and/or sentenced, under the sections 302 (murder), 304 (attempt to murder), 376 (rape), 4435 (arson), 436 (arson to destroy homestead) and 438 (arson in the ship or vessels).This article mentions it as so-called general amnesty to press home the argument that the nature of the amnesty was not that general in character; rather it was a qualified amnesty with significant reservations. The language of the amnesty is very clear; that the master minds of rape, arson and premeditated murder, and the actual executors would not be spared from being tried, while the foot-soldiers, and mere supporters, would be pardoned. Now that it is clear who was supposed to be tried, and who was not, this article intends to find out why the decision was misinterpreted, and how.
There are those who say that the happenings of August 15, 1975 were a mutiny or even a revolution. Even if we agree, for the sake of argument, that the killing of August 1975 was a Sepoy (soldier) Mutiny. Was there a provision in the constitution for the soldiers to go for a mutiny if they decided at a certain point of time to do so for any reason whatsoever? In any civilised country, any such unruly acts would be treated as treason and severely dealt with. There is no room for the disciplined soldiers/officers to become unruly and kill the President, his wife, sons, daughters-in-law, and many others. It is sad that some self proclaimed intellectuals can go so low and try to portray the cowardly killings of unarmed individuals (including pregnant women and children) as a mutiny. Even today, some people are blasting him on a regular basis for the release of 195 Pakistani war criminals. No one is bothered enough to tell these morons that how the Pakistani soldiers were deported to India before Bangabandhu was released from Pakistan, and how strongly he tried to put those Pakistani war criminals on trial defying Chinas veto in the United Nations and Pakistans threat to execute stranded Bangalis in retaliation; and finally, how they were released from India.
Bangabandhu is yet to get due recognition for the manner in which he managed to influence India to withdraw its troops from Bangladesh within months. He does not get enough appreciation for how he kept Bangladesh between capitalist and communist blocks by promoting a mixed-economy based on socialism; how he made sure that Bangladesh endure post-war natural calamities and international apathy; and how he made sure that the India-Bangladesh treaty was more favourable to Bangladesh than to India.
There is a school of thought in Bangladesh which propagates the view that after returning home from his captivity in Pakistan Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman should have handed over power to someone else and exercised moral authority without holding any government office. Well even if the man entertained this thought for sometime, being a true patriot and the consummate politician that he was, he could foresee what would have happened to the newly born country if he did not agree to become its chief executive. After all, the War was fought in his name and without getting into details of the matter a fierce civil war could have ensued which the nascent nation in its infancy could hardly afford to have.
Let us end the article by saying something about the Siraj Sikder issue. Bangabandhu delivered the speech (for which he has been maligned so much) on the 25th of January (some 24 days after the death of Siraj Sikdar) after the Parliament passed the 4th Amendment. The name of Siraj Sikdar came in passing, after he already delivered some 3,500 words out of total of about 6,000 words long speech describing in details some aspects of the amendment. By no means was he bragging over a murder. If one follows that speech carefully then it would be clear that he was simply stating that a criminal (which Sikdar by any definition was, albeit a criminal with some half-baked class annihilation theories) was apprehended and others will face the same fate.
The writer is Assistant Editor of The Independent and can be contacted at: [email protected]
