From: sahmed@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Saif Ahmed)
Subject: Re: Victory Day in Bangladesh (what about India?)
	<SAHMED.92Dec21120707@occs.cs.oberlin.edu> <1h7kahINNlso@hsc.usc.edu>
Organization: Oberlin College Computer Science
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:32:36 GMT
X-Posted-From: occs.cs.oberlin.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1h7kahINNlso@hsc.usc.edu> banerjee@hsc.usc.edu (Samit Banerjee) writes:
>In article <SAHMED.92Dec21120707@occs.cs.oberlin.edu> sahmed@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Saif Ahmed) writes:
>I have quoted sources in a previous article. Also, any library would have
>clippings from the NYT, Washington Post and Time magazine from that period.
>Time magazine in particular had an issue with Mujib on the cover, that had 
>details of the war. To the best of my knowledge, the 10,000+ figure I quoted
>above, is correct.

10,000 + on two fronts is more credible. But don't translate that into
the Indian military lost 10,000 men trying to give Bangladesh
independence, it's not quite the same thing. They lost the men in a
war with Pakistan trying to preserve their territorial integrity.

>period of time.  A trained, armed and highly motivated army can inflict
>greater damages.

We Bangladeshi's should know that quite well at least.

>The war started on the two fronts simultaneously. And while you are right 
>in saying that the war was not fought on the basis of any new found kinship
>with the Bangladeshi people, it is also true that the arrival in India of
>millions of refugees and the consequent drain on our resources was the
>primary motivating factor.  And while it is naive to expect a nation to send
>it's men to war simply for altruistic reasons, the humanitarian overtones
>of the 1971 war cannot be ignored or wished away. Whatever geopolitical
>or hegemonistic reasons the policy planners in New Deli may or may not have 
>had, it's importance was secondary compared to the genocide taking place 
>across our borders.

The humanitarian overtones is not ignored and is not wished away. The
help the Indian government gave us, in arms, and refugees and
eventually military help is much appreciated. A very large sum of
money was also collected by Bengali brothers and sisters across the
border in West Bengal to help the refugees. I was merely pointing out
that the war itself was not started on humanitarian reasons. And I
totally disagree that the importance of geopolitical interests were
secondary to the genocide as far as policy planners were concerned. If
that were the case why wait for 1 to 3 million people to get killed
before coming in.

>A ration card is pretty flimsy proof of Indian citizenship. And I wasnt even
>talking of the move to deport illegal refugees in New Delhi. These people
>came to India, post 1971.

A very large number of the refugees in Dehli came pre 1971.

>All those who entered the country prior to 1971 were housed in camps and 
>probably registered with some Government agency. There must be records 
>available to that effect which would probably be enough to convince the GOI
>of their status. Under the terms of the Assam accord that was signed, all
>refugees prior to 1971 were granted Indian citizenship.

Indian citizenship does not come in the form of a paper which one can
preserve to prove his/her citizenship. The GOI can claim at any time
that any given group of peole are not Indian citizens and expel them.

>>Aside from the fact that India managed to sell some weapons (needless
>>to say for a profit), I don't see how this would have anything to do
>>with India at all. Unless India wants to go by the once popular theory
>>that Mujib wanted to make Bangladesh into a state of India, in which
>>case the death sentence was quite appropriate for treason.

>Mujib may had his shortcomings - his overzealous idealism, his poor ability 
>to govern and his lack of vision in setting your country on the road to
>economic recovery. But a traitor he was not and I find it hard to believe
>you have that opinion of a man who gave you Independence.  

From the two responses to this I believe that either I have not
expressed myself correctly or the two respondents have been rather
hasty in reading my article. You mentioned in a previous article in a
sarcastic note that the killing of Mujib was a "payment" for India's
help. As I understood it you felt that it was a betrayal to India. I
proposed above that Mujib's killing only had to do with personal and
political conflicts and nothing to do with India. Unless you believe
the theory that Mujib wanted to make BD part of India. In which case
he would have been a traitor anyways. And Mujibs post-independence
shortcomings would not tarnish his contribution to the creation of
Bangladesh.

>Secondly, you have your facts mixed up. India did not sell any arms to
>Bangladesh. Mujib insisted that the Indian Army pull out of BD within six 
>months and the joint command be dissolved. That is what happened but in the
>process several arms and weapons including APC's and tanks remained behind 
>since our soldiers did not get an oppurtunity to recover them. 

I wasn't stating any facts, I was merely extrapolating from your
article. I had no clue as to where the Indian made weapons came from.
In fact I didn't even know the weapons that killed Mujib were Indian
made. But I am of the understanding that a well organized country
would not leave weapons behind. But if you insist they did I will take
your word for it that they did.

>If you want an example, look at Somalia. Exact the same scenario.

Somalia does not have a legitimate govt.

>>1) Since you raised the issue of the water sharing, it should be noted
>>that the Indian government never kept their promise of providing the
>>minimum amount of water they agreed to provide in the dry season. 

>extiction. Today with Haldia being online, the Calcutta port
>is of secondary importance, but back in the '80s, that was not the case.

Siltation can be solved much more easily than starvation. Nothing more
to say on that.

>The reason for the poor water flow in the Ganga is an increase in water
>usage upstream, mainly in Bihar and UP. The solution lies in linking the 
>Brahmaputra (which flows through areas having a much lower density of 
>population) with tha Ganga and not by constructing a reservoir in Nepal 
>(as theGOB has been proposing) so that the Farrakka barrage can be bypassed.

The reservoir in Nepal proposal was merely suggested once and killed
almost immediately. Right now the GOB and GOI are trying to work out a
water-sharing agreement and not building a reservoir. 

>This had nothing to do with the GOI. The agreement was challenged in court
>and the Indian judiciary not being the most efficient organisation in the
>world (probably an understatement, that) the process took time as it wound
>it's way through appeals and counter appeals. The political party involved
>(the BJP) was looking to stir up enough passions in West Bengal, which would
>hopefully help it during the elections.

You are telling me that if the govt. sincerely wanted to uphold the
agreement it could not have done so? If that was the case it could
have either returned the land it got in exchange, or let BD use the
corridor until the court decided on the issue. I know for a fact it
could have done the latter because it did let BD use the corridor at
random times for random periods. One month open, two weeks closed and
that sort of thing.

>>Despite the fact that BD and India should have been friends there are
>>many reasons on both sides for tension. One can only hope that they
>>will be settled and we can live in peace with our neighbour which has
>>assumed super-power status and doesn't fail to impress it on its
>>neighbours. 

>I will second that appeal. It will be sad if BD and India with so much
>shared heritage and history, cannot find grounds to live amicably.

>Samit

Regards 

Saif














--
                                                                          _
                                                                         / \
 ________________________________________________________________________\_/
/ \  							                   |
\_/ 									   |
| | Saifuddin Ahmed                                                        |
| | sahmed@occs.cs.oberlin.edu                                             |
| |________________________________________________________________________/
\_/


Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian