From: dchatterjee@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: On Deepak's Latest Article
Date: 10 Jan 93 16:01:25 CST
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

In article <9JAN199321225685@lheavx.gsfc.nasa.gov>, 
dipen@lheavx.gsfc.nasa.gov  writes:
>.... (deleted).......
>>       Dear Dipen ,
>>               Tell me then why Bangladesh always stands next to Pakistan
>>               when it comes to defaming India .
>>               Why do Bangladeshis always sympathize with Pakistanis during
>>               any Indo-Pak conflict ? Why ?
>>               Is that the way you show your gratitude ?
>>               Or is it because we are Hindus and don't deserve
>>               any thanks .
>>                                                       Deepak
>.......(deleted)........
>         using that term), received more than BNP. Unfortunately, BNP has
>         fostered an unholy tie with the Jamaat to retain its power position. 
> 	So, here is a country divided into different political and social 
> 	opinions. Jamaat was instrumental in the recent attacks on the Hindu 
> 	temples, but there were also active political and social groups who 
> 	condemned and protected.

  This is the major problem. What Deepak is saying is the voice of a majority
  of Hindus. I am completely aware of the Awami and left-leaning parties in
  Bangladesh. (In fact, Bangladesh is a story of struggle - when the Pak army
  mutiliated *both* Hindus and Muslims in 1971 war. The Muktifauj, fighting 
  war with IA, has fought the oppressive regime -bringing home the victorious
  Seikh of Barisal, who was imprisoned in Pakistan. 

  That was in Seikh's time. However, following that there has been and no one
  can deny a chain of uprisings in Bangladesh - lust for power. What about for
  example, Major Dalim ? How did Zia and Ershad come to power ? Only now, as I
  see, elections have been held. Prior to that, Bongobondhu's dreams were being
  turned into a throne of blood. (I think that what I have said is
  approximately true.)

  Following that, India's involvement was seen with *extreme* hatred - probably
  by Ghulam Azam (Jammat-i-Islam supporter) who was unfortunately granted total 
  amnesty by Seikh.

  The question is this: will the democratically elected government (GOB) 
  survive at all ??? Isn't the fact that Islamic fundamentalism in Bangladesh
  on the rise ? Did GOB ban the Jammat ? No. Why because BNP was forced into
  alliance with Jammat. It does indirectly prove that BNP shall have to concede
  to the hate-mongering Jammat from time to time - otherwise BNP will get
  toppled. The efforts in establishing democracy is fine, and, being strange
  bed-fellows with non-democratic organizations is quite alarming.

  I still have hopes on Bangladesh as it citizens understand what freedom is.
  In the struggle to liberate Bengladesh, I guess both Hindus and Muslims gave
  blood. The honor is probably equally shared. The country (albeit being 
  subjected to poverty and natural calamities) has shown enough moral courage
  of political restraint. However, GOB should contain Islamic fundamentalism
  within the prison walls and not on the streets and parliaments.

> 
> 	Let me reiterate two events just to show that not everything may be 
> 	a Hindu-Muslim issue. Recently, Bangladesh Govt. started forced
> 	repatriation of Rohingya refugees to Burma. These refugees are Muslim. 
> 	How would you explain that? One way to look at that is that it just 
> 	cannot afford (I personally oppose forced repatriation). It cannot 
> 	afford to keep the Rohingyas even though they are Muslims just as it 
> 	cannot afford not to have a negotiated settlement on the Farakka water
> 	issue. The latter case is another example of how confused this whole 
> 	thing is. The best deal up to this point that Bangladesh had with 
> 	India on the water sharing was during Sheikh Mujib's time. Now there 
> 	is no treaty even. One opinion is that India is not interested in a 
> 	settlement unless Dhaka has a friendly government. So what BNP will 
> 	do--be defiant or cry "uncle" to save the people. Who is the sufferer 
> 	in the long run? Poor farmers or the politicians in Dhaka and Delhi?
>

    The above is absolutely true. I agree. However, deportation of Burmese
    Muslims to Burma is *not* at all a crime. Why Bangladesh or India will
    have to suffer because some other country is giving a hard time to its
    own citizens ???? Amnesty International can cry-hoarse over Police
    Atrocities in India (1991 Report), but, one must remember that AI is a
    one-eyed jack. Its priorities are muddled. It *cannot* separate between
    Islamic fundamentalism and police brutalities. For Police brutalities,
    any government must pay the penalty. But, if JKLF forces in Kashmir are
    armed with AK-47 and go on a terrorist spree, these trigger-happy rascals
    (aided by Pakistan) *cannot* be shown a 5-star hotel to carry on their
    activities. Thus, unless AI isolates issues, it becomes impossible to 
    make things work. For example, had AI been in vogue in 1930's, what it
    would have said (presented opinions/ recommendations) on Surya Sen's
    "terrorist" attempts to occupy Jalalabad mountain in Chittagong in 1932 ?

    I mean who is a terrorist then ? The British, or Surya Sen - fighting for
    freedom from the foreign rule ? So identification of priorities is a major
    task. This has never been chalked out by AI. AI, *NEVER* comments on the
    major reason why police brutalities in India occur. For example (1991 
    report), AI quite factually shows how many died in jails in WB, but, it
    never mentions that there is a auto-regressive government in WB, headed
    by a communist thief called Joyti Basu. The root of such misconceptions
    (political) and disinformations is that Communist theories *NEVER* work
    in a parliamentary system of government. The friction caused by such a
    contradiction results in clashes of various kinds bureaucratic and
    otherwise, and, the result is AI's cry-hoarse attitude. If AI is an
    unbiased/ honest organization then the recommendation should have been 
    to *topple the GOWB* and implement President's rule in WB. Not coming up
    with the phony excuse in raising salaries for policemen and thereby will
    eradicating trouble/ injustice in the subcontinent.


>         There  is a government and there is a body of people, and
>         they are divided into many opinions. Some want to maintain normal
>         relation with India, some don't. To look at this conglomeration
>         with a monochromatic lens would be a mistake. The present govt.
>         does not acknowledge the help of India, but many other sections
>         do. One should not expect a whole-sale "thank you" from the entire
> 	spectrum of public opinion since so much has changed since 1971.
> 	I personally think the rabid anti-Hindu/anti-Indian stand of 
> 	Jamaat and anti-Indian stand of BNP are clouding up some real issues
> 	where Bangladesh have some legitimate grievances against Indian 
> 	policy.   
> 
     The above observation is really correct, but, does not absolve GOB of
     the sins. After all, the problem is with GOB and not India ! India has
     already *BANNED* VHP, Jammat-i-Islam, Bajrang Dal, and, Shiv Sena, but,
     Bangladesh *can* never do that ! This is known to most Indians, and, my
     friend Deepak is saying all what he has said based on this knowledge of
     GOB's incapicity to ban Jammat.


> 	Let me say a few words on Bangladeshi Hindus. In recent days Hindus 
> 	in Bangladesh have felt more insecure and frustrated. These Hindus or 
> 	their fore-fathers either could not afford or did not want to emigrate
> 	to India in 1947. One the other hand you will be hard-pressed to find 
> 	a single Hindu family in Bangladesh which is not divided (with some 
> 	relatives living in India). But now, as citizens of Bangladesh they 
> 	have to work within the system and garner the support of the 
> 	progressive and secular section of the society. They would like to see 
> 	a government which is sensitive to minority causes and upholds the 
> 	freedom charter of 1971 (I am afraid the recent turmoil in the 
> 	subcontinent would prevent us from having such a government). They 
> 	are also afraid that increasing communal hostility in 
> 	India will always generate retaliation in Bangladesh. It is not 
> 	supposed to be, but we live in a real vengeful world. As BJP/VHP/RSS 
> 	demand proofs of loyalty from Indian Muslims, Jamaat and a section of 
> 	BNP will try to undermine Hindu presence in Bangladesh. It seems VHP 
> 	and Jamaat are working for the same cause--a full polarization; the 
> 	two nation theory has risen from the ashes, this time the flag-bearers
> 	(VHP & Jamaat) have taken their oath directly from the dead hands of 
> 	Jinnah.


    This is again true. But, there is a distinct difference here. We (Hindus/
    Indians) have *NEVER* supported VHP's rabid Hindu fanaticsm. (BJP, BTW, is 
    *not* a communal party - it has a *LARGE* number of registered Muslims, 
    and, claims that there should be a *single Federal* law for all Indians. 
    I think this is a civilized demand, or is it not ?) Thus BJP is *not* a
    communal organization per se. The contradiction is that the demands for a
    single code, and, that dar-ul-Islams to be destroyed is a natural cause
    for VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS, Shiv Sena etc. to be thick with BJP. Since, 
    the "secular" issue is seen by many Muslims as anti-Islam, the communal
    tension is fostered.

    This is the major problem of communal tesnion in India.

> 	
>   	  One more thing. When a majority (or a powerful nation), which is
>         unsure of itself and insecure, demands a collective apology (or
>         gratitude) from a minority section for events which happened in
>         distant past, it is to be pitied. What can be more pathetic than a
>         majority which pities itself. Of course, in these days of
>         tribalism, when a misplaced sense of honour of taking revenge
>         has pervaded us all, such finer perceptions would matter very
>         little.
>

          I find such line of argument quite amusing. It is as if you are
          apologising for what was committed by Shiv Sena in Ayodhya and
          Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan - stoning 6 Hindu children
          to death. This shows that the most powerful weapon is religion.
          To foment hatred in the name of Allah, Vishnu is a fashionable
          exercise which has replaced watching videos in the living room.

 >         shubhechha, Dipen



      I just have one question: why AI *never* has emphasized that 
      religion will have to be de-emphasized to maintain harmony in
      the sub-continent ?????? (De-emphasizing *does not* imply that
      religion is to be banned. Political emphasis will be de-emphasized.)

       - regards,

        deb chatterjee
     (a good samaritan)
                                                 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.bangladesh:7457 soc.culture.indian:43535 soc.culture.pakistan:19406