Bharat Rakshak

Avinash R wrote:

Dilbu wrote:It is not Hasina's job but India's to make sure the Razakars are purged.

The razakars are bangladeshis. The right person to bring them to justice is the bangla govt and sheikh haseena being the bangla pm is the right person to do it. How can india enter the scene here when the razakars are not our citizens?

Few questions have been bothering me for last few days, can anyone enlighten me with answers??

1. Hon'ble PM went to Pilkhana on Tuesday morning and was again due on Wednesday evening (as the BDR week was on). As per protocol the keys to Arsenal then should remain with SSF, but how come the BDR Jawans had it?

2. Even in normal circumstances it should remain with an Officer and not with a Subedar or Jawan.

3. On 22nd there was supposed to be a joint BDR-BSF March Past. BSF pulled out without showing any cause and at the last moment, any idea as to why?

4. We have our military intelligence (however oxymoronic it sounds). With PM due, they should have known about the mutiny. If it was a spur of the moment thing, then they not being aware could have been acceptable. But now as it is being circulated that it was a long planned thing and crores of Tk. was used for this (Mr. Nanak said so), one does wonder what they were doing? If there was a discontent over a period then they should have known it. Or they were too busy taking information on politicians that they forgot to report it to the Govt.

5. On Wednesday the amnesty was declared, but why there was so much delay in making it official? After waiting for couple of hours something (yes I mean storming Pilkhana) could have carried out. Why did we wait for that long?

6. Why one junior Minister and even more junior whip were sent to negotiate? Mind you these two Hon'ble persons were safely tucked away in India during 1-11 regime.

7. State Minister for Home was absent from the scene. Why? He was very vocal and constantly in media previously, but never seen during this crisis?

8. Did anyone mark the discrepancies in statements of rescued/ freed army officers? Some say, bodies were burnt, some says not.

9. First two days media was BDR sympathetic, but since Friday (after army chief visited PM) the tune changed and BDR vilification began. The most laughable was the clip showing RAB asking a chap in a bus, "Who are you" and the guy meekly saying "I work for BDR". Jeez, we all know that defence has their brain down somewhere of the anatomy, but someone who is running away would answer in such obvious way? Gimme a break. What do the media take us for?

10. Why was there a sudden blackout on Thursday night as Armed Police Battalion entered Pilkhana. There was no power outage until then.

11. No one is saying how many BDR was inside the Pilkhana at the time of mutiny. We know that about two hundred was in the barracks, and another about two hundred is caught while fleeing. So far I know, at any given point there are about 12,000 BDR jawans in pilkhana, what happened to the rest? If they all fled, then what the Army and RAB was doing who surrounded and cordoned off the area? Home Minister said about 3,300 surrendered the arms. The numbers just don't add up, does it?

12. Why state mourning for army officials only? Civilians do not count?

13. 5 lac tk. For the families of armies. Why not the civilians?

14. Can our journalists be a little more humane? On Wednesday, when some civilians were carrying a wounded man on their shoulders, they blocked the rescue path to take photos. On Thursday, when all on a sudden the notice to evacuate was issued and people were running away, they were blocking and asking where they were going and why? What an idiotic question to ask people frantically running to save their lives. Or asking the family members of missing army personnel what they are doing in from of BDR gate. Height of insensitivity and idiocy if you ask me.

15. One so called journalist/political analyst in ETV (BTW, CEO of ETV claims to be an AL supporter, but I have letters signed by him, claiming himself to be a Bangladeshi Jatiyotabadi, I guess he changed his colours as it suits him), stated that he is ashamed to call himself a journalist as few called the incident as a mutiny, in his view it is nothing but a planned killing spree. What made him say that? Does he know something that he didn't share with the general public? Same goes for Mr. Nanak's statement about crores of Tk. Being spent to make this happen? We general people would love to know that and help the Govt. to maintain our sovereignty.

16. Last but not the least, "What is meant by General Amnesty"????????

One version suggests the person who raised the question was disciplined soon after but others said the flashpoint came the following morning. On February 25, during the daily morning parade when Ahmed was taking the salute, one trooper raised his voice and asked the chief why he did not take up the BDR's grievances with Hasina.

Ahmed told the soldier to "fall out" and asked a junior officer to punish him. According to one account, the trooper was to be put into the doghouse — a small confined space where he would roil in the sun. In another account, he was to carry a recoilless gun or a rifle over his head and run several rounds around the courtyard till his legs felt like jelly and his arms limp. A comrade could not take this. Soldiers at parade to give the salute to the superior are not usually armed unless they are ready to go into action. The comrade ran to the corner where arms were stockpiled, pulled out a pistol, scurried back and, in a fit of rage, pumped the major general with bullets in the courtyard.

But mutineers who came out this evening claimed that Ahmed opened fire on the sepoy who questioned him, triggering the mutiny. In minutes, the courtyard was showered with bullets, some from pistols, some from recoilless guns manned in twos and threes and, later, aimed at helicopters.

Some men manned mortars. Shells littered the streets of Dhanmandi and New Market. A rickshawpuller was killed. So were Colonel Mujibul Haq, once a leader of the simply named Operation Dal Bhaat in the Dhaka sector, and Lt Colonel Enayet, the commander of the 36 Battalion. The rebels held out for several hours even after Hasina offered a general amnesty last evening, insisting that the army be withdrawn and they would surrender only to one of their superiors. Eventually, the government asked Subedar Major Mohammad Touhid, said to be the senior-most in the original border force cadre, to accept the arms.

By then, Hasina had gone on air to warn of tough measures. "We don't want to use force," Hasina said. "But don't play with our patience. We will not hesitate to do whatever is needed to end the violence…." She also sent in tanks as another persuasive measure. Twenty tanks and 15 armoured vehicles with heavy machine guns from the ninth division — notorious for its role in coups — rumbled into Dhaka, taking up positions in residential neighbourhoods around the BDR complex.

The mutineers then hoisted a white flag and completed the surrender by late evening. Before the surrender, unrest broke out in several parts of Bangladesh, possibly whipped up by the hardline Jamaat-e-Islami. At least three BDR commanding officers were reportedly shot dead in Rajshahi, Satkhira and Teknaf. Sources said Touhid could be holding fort for the time being but eventually an army officer of the rank of major general would be given charge of the border force.

The murder of Ahmed's wife stood out for betrayal and brutality: a personal security guard emptied his gun on her in the family's quarters inside the BDR complex, highly placed sources told The Telegraph. "Her body was put in a jeep and the vehicle was set ablaze," a witness said in Dhaka. The treachery carried echoes of another subcontinental tragedy — the assassination of Indira Gandhi who was gunned down by her bodyguards.

Reports reaching New Delhi said one of Ahmed's two daughters was also killed along with her mother. But another version in Dhaka said the daughters escaped because they were in a school outside the compound, writing examinations. The Telegraph could not confirm either version independently. By the time the wife fell to the bullets of the guard, probably a runner who took care of errands, the major general himself had been shot by a sepoy in a fit of rage, according to multiple sources in Dhaka as well as Delhi.

Dhaka has requested New Delhi to disarm and hand over Bangladesh Rifles mutineers trying to flee into India with the Bangladesh Army hot on their heels, officials here told The Telegraph. The increased security on the border with Bangladesh has largely to do with this request. The border — which runs for more than 4,000km, is largely fenced inside Indian territory and does not follow defined markers — has been reinforced with additional BSF units. The security establishment has concluded that it does not require a realignment of forces in the eastern and northeastern theatres for this purpose.

Dhaka has told New Delhi that firing that may be heard on this side, or bullets that may cross the border, should not be misunderstood as signs of aggression: they are aimed at mutineers who have not yet turned themselves in. Around 700 armed BDR men are said to be on the run. But it is the request to disarm BDR mutineers that is uncomfortable for India. The US too is encouraging India to play a "stabilising role" in the region. "India doesn't want to meddle in Bangladesh's internal affairs, though it risks being affected by them," said Sreeradha Datta, Bangladesh specialist and fellow at the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis.

"While India may be sympathetic to what is happening with Bangladesh's internal crisis, it will not be dictated (to on) what action it should be taking." Datta explained: "I would try to prevent elements from coming over to India, by force if necessary and even if the US wants us to. India should not be seen as a party to disarming the BDR."

Yesterday, home minister P. Chidambaram had confirmed that BDR soldiers at outposts in two or three places had communicated to their BSF counterparts in some frontier bunkers that they might request shelter because the army was after them. The appeals have been made in about 30 places on the borders in Bengal, Assam, Meghalaya and Tripura.

In some outposts, BDR soldiers have sent written notes to their BSF counterparts seeking shelter, saying they have a rampaging army pursuing them. The developments signal that the Bangladesh Army is now baying for blood and wants to avenge the massacre of its officers — most of whom are sons of army officers and civilian bureaucrats — by the BDR mutineers. It also explains the turnaround by Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina who said amnesty would not be granted to killers. The army chief, General Moeen U. Ahmed, himself under pressure from his cadre, had met Hasina and conveyed the demand from the army for swift justice.

The army wants public punishment, even death, for the killers of the BDR director-general, Major General Shakil Ahmed, his wife, the deputy director-general and scores of other officers whose bodies are being dug out of mass graves. The army is expecting 50-100 mutineers to be handed exemplary punishment that could go up to the death sentence.

Indian officers monitoring the developments said General Moeen Ahmed was confronted by his officers in the cantonment before he went to meet Hasina. If Hasina can restrain the army and follow the due process, she will emerge stronger. "The next five-six days are crucial," a source said, suggesting the government was focusing its efforts on preventing a backlash from the army.

One silver lining — for India, too — is that the Bangladesh Army is not as politicised as the BDR is. The army had also built bridges with India of late. After the meeting last night, General Moeen Ahmed reaffirmed army support for the government. "Let me tell you all again that the Bangladesh Army is subservient to the government," he said. "We are a people's army serving the nation and upholding democracy. Please stay calm. We are trying to address the situation and resolve (disputes) with the help of everyone."

Hasina's long-standing rival, Opposition leader Khaleda Zia, offered to co-operate with the government in its investigations into the mutiny but criticised the Prime Minister for initially offering amnesty to the BDR rebels. "This gave them time to kill more people and conceal their brutality," Khaleda said. Hasina's Awami League has had a traditionally tenuous relationship with the army, which has had better relations with Khaleda's Bangladesh National Party. The party of Khaleda, widow of former army chief General Zia-ur Rehman, has also attracted former army officers as leaders in larger numbers than the Awami League.

Indian officers, however, admit that the grievances over pay and perks in the BDR are genuine and the mutiny, if organised, could not have been the handiwork of the Jamaat and fundamentalist elements from the very beginning. This is understandable because disgruntlement in the Indian security forces is all too real. Indian military forces, for example, are now resentful over recommendations of the sixth pay commission. Other agencies, like the Assam Rifles officered by the army, too have issues which they have raised time and again with the government and which are still being addressed.

The latent discontent in the BDR is suspected to have been fanned by fundamentalist forces, aided by the ISI. Other sources said that over the years, the BDR, which had fought against Pakistan in the Liberation War, had been politicised and came to be divided into two camps — one supporting Awami League and the other backing the BNP. The BNP faction is said to have been infiltrated by elements sympathetic to the Jamaat and the Huji. The spilling over of the BDR mutiny outside Dhaka may have been fomented by the Jamaat, the sources said.

Dhaka's request that the mutineers be disarmed by Indian forces and be handed over to the Bangladesh Army has the tacit blessings of the US. But India does not want to be seen as acting under international pressure and wants to confine itself to acting in its own interests.

During the mutiny, around 3300 BDR members were inside the BDR headquarters while the number of commissioned officers was 160, concerned official sources said.

Before 2002, only very average army officers were posted to BDR. Those officers used to pass time and wait for retirement. the scenario was changed in late 2002, when army started to pump in outstanding oficers to BDR to shape up the national border and curb cross-border crime and smuggling. Before 2002, the BDR jawans were very rich through the earning of smuggling. their sepoys and naiks and havilders had buildings and house that even officers can only dream of.

After 2002, smuggling and its sharing by BDR jawans started coming down. capture of smuggling figures, if you can manage, will rightly prove that. therefore the young BDR jawans that were pictured from pilkhana were the young ppl with 5-10 years of service who couldn't earn from smuggling. their seniors told them, "You see, we have made house when we were sepoy, but you can't have now because army officers are making money and not sharing with you." this is theme they used to motivate the young jawans.

• RAB arrives at Pilkhana gate at about 10am and ready to move in. Home Ministry said a stubborn "No".
• Troops of Mirpur Cantt and Dhaka Cantt arrives at Pilkhana by 11:30am. they seek permission to go in. Again a big "No"
• Innocent Media people, bluffed by the BDR jawans, focus to the nation the good side or the "right cause" of rebellion BDR. they ask for BCS officers....!!!
• Govt sends nanok and others and they enter courageously into BDR Pilkhana and safely come back and they are not held hostage.
• At 4:30pm, army tanks are ready to go in, briefing done, again a big "No". The army is told to go 3 km away from Pilkhana.
• Night comes. sahara and nanok enter BDR and all lights are off. sahara visits families of army officers without nanok as seen on TV channels through BTV footage. she does not, we repeat DOES NOT meet any army officer of BDR.
• media people telecast live sound of firing from inside Pilkhana when sahara is inside.
• sahara comes out and faces the media. some channel representative asks her "Apni jokhon vitorey chilen, amra goolir shobdo shunlam, apni shunen ni?" she say "No. I did not hear any firing". sahara did not mention anything about the 168 officers inside, nor the media asked her where were the officers.
• THIS WAS BECAUSE AT THAT TIME BDR WAS COMPLETING THE TOTAL KILLING OF ALIVE OFFICERS AND THIER FAMILIES UNDER THE EYES OF NANOK AND MASS GRAVES WERE BEING PREPARED. Please refer to the Ntv exclusive with major Mokarram on 28th evening. He said that he heard the voice of home minister entering into the kote when he was surrounded by BDR gunmen.
• IG police freely moved in because his daughter and son in law capt haider was inside. he ensured the rescue of his daughter, married 82 days earlier.
• only police is allowed to enter pilkhana and throughout the night they find only 7 dead bodies and suggest that search could not be done due to darkness.
• NON-MILITARY AMBULANCES ENTER AND LEAVE PILKHANA A NUMBER OF TIMES AND TAKES AWAY SO MANY DEAD BODIES...BUT THE TOTAL STILL REMAINS 7. only 5-7 other bodies appear from canal behind BDR naturally floating. IT WAS BECAUSE ABOUT 32 KILLERS WERE TAKEN AWAY BY THOSE AMBULANCES.
• Next morning there is no sign of bodies. Bodies and mass graves are discovered after army and fire brigade (fire brigade boss is a brigadier of army) enter into pilkhana late in the morning.
• Size and depth of mass graves indicate that killers used the whole night to dig those and also to FLY AWAY from PILKHANA. only about 200 fools of BDR were left at Pilkhana.
• Nanok in a media briefing in front of Pilkhana declares that "It was a big conspiracy" and lac lac crore taka were distributed in Pilkhana." DEAR MEDIA, HE WAS RIGHT. BECAUSE EACH DAD WORKING AT PILKHANA GOT TK 25 LAC between 22 and 24th February, distributed by nanok's men.

6. you see how brutally the representative of Bangladeshi people, elected just 50 days back-- sahara, nanok, mirza azam and jalil...all of them ensured that your officers and their familes, the officers of Bangladeshi people, are killed and molested. Only about 37 or 57 officers were killed in our War of Liberation 1971 by pakistanis in 9 months. and our own ministers and MPs ensured that more than 140 officers and families are killed in about 24 hours!!! What an achievement of our nation!!

Yesterday the Guardian was taken on a tour of the colonial bungalow where Maj Gen Ahmed, his wife and another military couple, Colonel Delowar and his wife, were killed. There was blood on the wall and floor, among the shattered glass and broken furniture. The army said Col Delowar was beaten repeatedly over the head with a stone, and that his wife died after a television was dropped on her skull.

Mrs Ahmed was shot, raped and killed by being thrown off a five-floor building, the army said. The body of the major general was found in a shallow grave. Many of the bodies were dumped in hastily dug holes covered by little more than mounds of dirt. Others had been thrown into the sewers of the sprawling compound that housed the soldiers and many of their families.

Mrs IG was livid at RAW for being surprised at the coup against Mujib Ur Rehman. So there is track record of sleeping on the job .

Dhaka's request that the mutineers be disarmed by Indian forces and be handed over to the Bangladesh Army has the tacit blessings of the US. But India does not want to be seen as acting under international pressure and wants to confine itself to acting in its own interests.

Many of the lower ranking Razakars who remained in Bangladesh were killed in the course of reprisals immediately after the end of fighting while as many as 36,000 were imprisoned. Of the latter many were later freed mainly because of pressure from US and China who backed Pakistan in the war, and because Pakistan was holding 200,000 Bengali speaking military and civilian personnel who were stranded in West Pakistan during the war.

Immediately after the war, the topic of putting the war criminals to trial arose. Just as the war ended, Bangladeshi prime minister Tajuddin Ahmed admitted to Professor Anisuzzaman that the trial of the alleged Pakistani military personnel may not be possible because of pressures from the US. He also told that India and Soviet Union are not interested about the trial. On 24 December 1971 Home minister of Bangladesh A. H. M. Qamaruzzaman said, "war criminals will not survive from the hands of law. Pakistani military personnel who were involved with killing and raping have to face tribunal."

In a joint statement after a meeting between Sheikh Mujib and Indira Gandhi, Indian government assured of giving all the assistance for bringing war criminals into justice. By July 1972, Bangladeshi government reduced the number of alleged war criminals from 400 to 195. In his book "Liberation and Beyond", JN Dixit wrote that the Bangladeshi government was not interested about gathering evidence about the handful amount of war criminals. He was uncertain about the reason behind this approach and figured it as a result of a possible negotiation between the Bangladeshi and Pakistani government. He thought that Sheikh Mujib did not want to do anything that would stop Pakistan and other Muslim states from giving Bangladesh the official recognition. Worldwide support in favor of war trial faded after the 3 nation agreement.

On 29 December 1991 one of the known alleged war criminal Ghulam Azam became the Chairman or Aamir of Jamaat-E-Islami which prompted political debates. As a result, a National Committee was established after a proposal of writer and political activist Jahanara Imam. Subsequently on 14 February 1992 "Ekattorer Ghatak-Dalal Nirmul Committee" was formed to bring Azam and his followers to trial. 6 March 52 Muslim clerics supported the effort. An open court named Gonoadalot was formed and on 26 March 1992 Jahanara Imam read out the verdict against Azam. Following the verdict Sheikh Hasina moved a proposal in the house to begin the prosecution, but it was not passed.

In 1992, after restoration of democracy, an unofficial and self-proclaimed “Court of People” (Bengali: গণআদালত Gonoadalot) “sentenced” Ghulam Azam and his ten accomplices to death for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Jamaat-e-Islami was already a part of the ruling four-party alliance in Bangladesh and so the “verdict” was ignored. Moreover, the then BNP government returned Bangladeshi nationality to Ghulam Azam, as it had been taken from him after the war. Subdued during the rule of Awami League from 1996-2001, Jamaat returned in full force after the next election in October 2001 in which a four party alliance led by BNP won a landslide victory. The new leader of Jamaat after Ghulam Azam’s retirement, Motiur Rahman Nizami, a Rajakar and among the ten people tried by the Gonoadalot, became an influential minister in the Government.

The Pakistani Army created paramilitary vigilante forces, called Razakars and Al-Badrs, who took over the dubious task of pursuing their fellow citizens after each military operation. A significant number of these paramilitary forces were recruited from amongst migrants from UP and Bihar who felt that their future interests would be safeguarded only if they supported West Pakistani terror. The ethnic dimension of this repression structured by the military regime created a deep divide between the Bengalis and non-Bengalis of East Pakistan.

There was growing support and sympathy for the cause of Bangladesh’s liberation. In stark contrast to this the majority of governments, not only of the Western democracies but also the countries of the Non-Aligned group and the socialist bloc, were opposed to the liberation of Bangladesh or the fragmentation of Pakistan.

The attitude of the Nixon administration was anti-Indian on the entire gamut of issues relating to developments in East Pakistan. Nixon’s antipathy towards India was neither rooted in ideology nor coloured by political factors. It was entirely a matter of Nixon’s flawed personal chemistry with Mrs Gandhi, going back to the time when he was vice-president under President Eisenhower. Nixon had visited India in the early 1960s at a point of time when his reputation was very high as a “Cold
Warrior” and the winner of “the kitchen debate” with Khruschev in Moscow. He was treated rather perfunctorily by Mrs Gandhi and the Indian leadership because both Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi had a better personal equation with Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson as well as the leadership of the Democratic Party. Nixon had proceeded to Pakistan from India. In contrast to the treatment in New Delhi, he was lionised by Field Marshal Ayub Khan and the Pakistan Government. He never forgave Mrs Gandhi and the Government of India for the lack of attention and high courtesy he thought he deserved. Mrs Gandhi on her part has been described in her interaction with President Nixon as aloof and indifferent. The US nevertheless was an object of primary attention in India’s foreign policy at that point of time.

Foreign Minister Swaran Singh visited Washington in June 1971 to brief US authorities about the developing tragedy in East Pakistan. He urged the US Government to stop military assistance and to apply economic sanctions against the Yahya regime to extract from it a positive response for the people of East Pakistan. The effort proved futile. Nixon and Kissinger owed too much to Yahya for his help in establishing contact with the Chinese leadership. It was during late August and early September 1971 that the US decided to adopt the policy that came to be known as “the tilt in favour of Pakistan”. Though a general policy statement was made about the US discontinuing military support to Pakistan, supplies continued. From late August onwards messages started coming suggesting that the US would
discontinue economic assistance to India if it persisted in supporting the East Pakistan movement. An interesting example of political theatrics took place when the US ambassador to New Delhi, Kenneth Keating, told Mrs Gandhi at a meeting in her South Block office that the US wished to avoid taking the embarrassing decision to stop economic assistance to and cooperation with India and hoped that India would reconsider its policies on the East Pakistan issue. Mrs Gandhi’s response was prompt and decisive. She told Keating that there was no need for the US to feel embarrassed and suggested the immediate closure of the US Aid Mission Office in New Delhi. She stuck to her decision. The office, located in a well-appointed complex of buildings on what was then known as Mehrauli Road (now Aurobindo Marg), was closed down. The building was converted into a hotel (Qutub Hotel) by
the India Tourism Development Corporation.
......
In the General Assembly, 117 members participated in the general debate of whom 55, excluding India and Pakistan, referred to Bangladesh in their statements. It is interesting that only India and four other countries in the entire UN advocated a political settlement of the East Pakistan crisis in consultation with the people of East Pakistan. The reaction of all the other countries was both ambiguous and pusillanimous.

Four countries “specifically” stated that a political solution should be reached in consultation with the elected representatives of the people: France (“a political solution based on the consent of the Pakistani people”), Mongolia (“a settlement by political means in accordance with the interests of its people”), New Zealand, and Sweden (“a political solution based on the will of the people as expressed through the ballot”).

During the initial days of my assignment in the Indian embassy in Bangladesh in 1972, the Prime Minister Tajuddin told me that when Bhutto decided to release Mujib between 4 and 7 January 1972, he took the first step towards safeguarding the interests of the Pakistani military. Before his release and departure via London and Turkey, Bhutto is reported to have told Mujib that as a quid pro quo for his release he should help in freeing the prisoners of war and in not holding war crime trials. Bhutto is reported to have used the argument of solidarity among Muslims in support of his advocacy. He also reportedly reminded Mujib of his own contribution to the Muslim League’s struggle for Pakistan before Partition, whatever the later
differences and controversies might have been. Mujib’s policies and attitudes on the issues between 1972 and 1974 lend credence to these
reports.

Having achieved his immediate objectives, Bhutto concentrated on the two remaining aims: preventing the war crime trials and reestablishing Islamic links with Bangladesh. Though a bitter rival, Bhutto was accurate in his perception about Mujib’s subconscious Islamic inclinations and his innate reservations about India, which Mujib viewed through the prism of his complexes about West Bengal. From 1973 onwards Bhutto sounded Mujib about Bangladesh joining the OIC, with the attractive proposition of Bangladesh emerging as a major South Asian Islamic country. When Mujib responded positively to this courtship by other Islamic countries, it was conveyed Bangladesh would get recognition from Pakistan and admission to the OIC if war crime trials were not held. The deal was struck some time between November 1973 and January 1974.

Mujib participated in the Islamic summit in Lahore in February 1974, despite a fair amount of opposition and doubts from his old comrades in the Awami League. Mujib returned, Pakistan recognised Bangladesh, and Bhutto was invited to visit Dacca. Bhutto’s interaction with Bangladesh during the period had a single motive: to erode the political and strategic objectives achieved by India in the 1971 war. In the process he sought to revive the Islamic consciousness in Bangladesh. In private conversations, he is reported to have told his senior party advisers that India might have created Bangladesh, but he would see that India would have to deal with not one, but two Pakistans, one in the west and another in the east.

A digression here would reveal the accuracy of his assessment of the Bangladeshi psyche and also his capacity to achieve maximum domestic
impact. During his visit to Dacca in July 1974, the roads from Tejgaon airport to his guest house were chock-a-block with the citizenry. It was not a hostile crowd, given that this very people had bayed for his blood in 1971. Being the acting high commissioner for India, I was in the reception line. When I was introduced, he shook hands with me and turned to Mujib and then producing something between a statement and a query said: “Now that we are rearranging subcontinental geography according to the wishes of the people, Mr Dixit, I suppose you and I could talk about settling the Kashmir issue accordingly.” The subject he raised was indicative of his thinking. The occasion he chose and the person to whom he spoke were inappropriate except as an attempt to satirise Mujib and his attitude towards India. What followed was profoundly significant and an indication of the shape of things to come.

As the motorcade moved out, Mujib’s car was decorated with garlands of chappals and anti-Awami League slogans were shouted together with slogans such as: “Bhutto Zindabad”, and “Bangladesh-Pakistan Friendship Zindabad”. The diplomatic motorcade followed the main motorcade and as my car reached the junction where the road turns left to the Intercontinental Hotel and the government guest house, the crowd, recognising the Indian flag, shook and jostled my car and shouted anti- India slogans. I returned to my office chastened and ruminating about the twists of history and politics.

Earlier, in the United Nations General Assembly session in 1972—on Pakistan’s instigation and of course on the basis of its own calculations—China had vetoed Bangladesh’s admission to the UN. Bangladesh was admitted after its contacts with Pakistan were established. But the story does not end there. Apropos of Bhutto’s machinations, Bangladeshis were keen he pay homage at the Martyrs’ memorial at Sawar with formal military ceremony. Bhutto was most reluctant. The ceremony was to be held on Friday afternoon, so he first delayed going there, saying that being a devout Muslim he had to offer Friday prayers and therefore he could not go at the scheduled time. However, he could not withstand Bangladesh’s insistence and proceeded there late in the afternoon, not in the formal attire appropriate for the occasion but in casual clothes with a golfing cap, to place a wreath. He said that his going was conditional on no military ceremony being held. According to reports no military ceremony was held.

There were three results of Bhutto’s visit to Bangladesh that had an impact on Indo-Pakistan and Indo-Bangladesh relations. He persuaded Mujib to reabsorb into the Bangladeshi military and civil services those Bangladeshi officers who had not endorsed the freedom movement, some of whom were still returning from Pakistan and other places. Second, he sowed the seeds for the revival of the Islamic character of the Bangladeshi polity by advising Mujib that now that he was free, he should gradually reclaim his country’s Islamic identity to consolidate his domestic political position as well as counter excessive influence by India. Third, he told Mujib that to balance India’s influence and to retain Bangladesh’s freedom of options, a good equation with Pakistan would be both relevant and necessary. Mujib’s actions and policies from 1974 and till his assassination in 1975 indicate that his words were not ignored.

3. On 22nd there was supposed to be a joint BDR-BSF March Past. BSF pulled out without showing any cause and at the last moment, any idea as to why?

RayC wrote:

3. On 22nd there was supposed to be a joint BDR-BSF March Past. BSF pulled out without showing any cause and at the last moment, any idea as to why?

Is this bloke suggesting that India knew about the mutiny and is he suggesting an Indian link?

A police officer last night filed a case against more than 1,000 members of Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) on charge of having ties to the mutiny at Pilkhana. Lalbagh police chief Nabo Jyoti Khisa filed the case. According to the case details, four deputy assistant directors (DAD), a sepoy and a BDR personnel led the revolt that left at least 64 army officers killed.

The suspected ringleaders are DADs Touhidul Alam, Nasiruddin Khan, Mirza Habibur Rahman, Abdul Jalil, sepoy Md Selim and BDR member Abdur Rahim.

Nabo Jyoti alleged that the accused people killed the officers and their relatives in a planned way. The police officer accused the BDR men of taking hostages, committing arsons and hiding dead bodies. Accused Abdul Jalil was now undergoing treatment at the Holy Family Red Crescent Medical College and Hospital in the capital.

He was part of the 14-member team that met Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on Wednesday to vent their demands. Md Nowsher Ali, joint commissioner (crime) of Dhaka Metropolitan Police, who has been supervising the case, told The Daily Star that the six suspects were identified in the primary investigation. He said further investigations would identify the rest.

PM seeks FBI help to investigate BDR mutiny

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina today sought help from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) of the United States to find out the ringleaders of the bloodshed at the BDR headquarters in Pilkhana. She sought the assistance during a telephone conversation with US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Richard Boucher this morning, according to a Foreign Ministry statement.

During the phone talk, the prime minister observed that the February 25-26 Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) incident might be part of a “conspiracy”. She sought assistance of the FBI in the investigation to dig out real culprits and mete out appropriate punishment to them. The US embassy in a statement said Boucher, on behalf of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, telephoned Hasina to express continued support for the Bangladesh government and its people.

Boucher lauded the government’s efforts to assist the survivors, honour those who were killed, and bring those guilty to justice. He stressed the importance of national unity during this crucial time and encouraged all Bangladeshis to work together to overcome this “national tragedy”. The senior state department official emphasized, in particular, the importance of cooperation between the government and the opposition to resolve the crisis.

He reiterated the United States’ willingness to extend “all possible assistance to the government”. Commander the US Pacific Command Admiral Timothy Keating, meanwhile, wrote to Army Chief General Moeen U Ahmed on February 28 to express condolences for the loss of life.

A source in the C&F Staff Welfare Association said the workers stopped import and export following a recent announcement that the driver concerned would not get bail if anybody is killed in a road accident in the area. Panic gripped the drivers and helpers of the trucks at Benapole in Bangladesh side and Petrapole in India as Black Cat commandoes and additional BSF troops carrying heavy weapons were deployed in Petrapole port area.

Export-import between Bangladesh and India through Sonamasjid land port in Chapainawabganj resumed yesterday. The activities at the port came to a halt on Thursday following BDR mutiny at its headquarters in Dhaka. With resumption of the activities, around 220 goods-laden trucks that were stranded at Mohodipur in India entered Bangladesh. Trucks carrying goods from Bangladesh also started entering India, said Jahangir Hossain, manager of Sonamasjid-Panama Port Link Limited.

Another reason that BD is going the pakisatan way...

the encirclement of India continues.

RayC wrote:Sheik Mujib was no angel.
He was a communalist and steeped in Islamic zeal.
He joined the Bengal Muslim League in 1943 and grew close to the faction led by Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, a leading Bengali Muslim leader. During this period, Mujib worked actively for the League's cause of a separate Muslim state of Pakistan and in 1946
Mujib was one of the Muslim politicians working under Suhrawardy during the communal violence that broke out in Calcutta, in 1946, just before the partition of India.
It is just that Mujib and India in 1971 was mutually beneficial.

Prime minister Sheikh Hasina Sunday said in parliament that her 50-day-old government focused more on saving thousands of innocent civilian lives while dealing with the Feb 25-26 mutiny, which she said was "completely pre-planned massacre". "I decided to talk myself ... I'd talk with anyone, I thought, to save lives, to save the families, to save the soldiers," she said, replying to charges that she made a tactical mistake by not using force.

In her first public remarks since the speech Thursday, she said she did not "waste a single moment" before taking steps and recalled that the rebels were "threatening to shoot anyone" in case of a move to use force. "You must surrender, release the hostages, release the officers," Hasina quoted herself as telling the 14 BDR men she had negotiations with on Wednesday just hours into the crisis. "That's why these families survived ... these little children survived. {This is hiding behind what was saved and forgetting what was lost}

"What else could we have done?" She said: "This is unprecedented that we have been able to end such a mutiny and the hostage crisis at such a short time." "This was completely pre-planned murder," she said. "I won't say anything now, since the investigation is on," the prime minister said as she referred to those "who organised cars, boats to help them flee".

Phone conversation with Gen Shakil

The prime minister disclosed for the first time she had talked on the phone with the slain BDR chief Shakil Ahmed, who she said she knew personally. "He is first cousin of one of our MPs (from Brahmanbaria)." "Gen Shakil told me: 'we are under attack, being shot at'." Hasina said she ordered immediate action, asked army and RAB to rush. Her military adviser Tarique Ahmed Siddique, a former major general, first broke the news to Hasina at around 9:30 am and then called the army chief.

"How long would it take? I asked the army chief. (I was told) it'd take one to two hours," she said. "We talked to air force. RAB was late, said they got stuck in traffic. "The rebels meanwhile were threatening to kill anyone who would try to advance towards them. "We called Shakil again, several times, but there was no answer," the prime minister said of the first minutes. "I called the three chiefs to a meeting."

No mercy for killers

"Now they are nitpicking," she retorted, replying to opposition leader Khaleda Zia's charge that amnesty decision was wrong and that use of force would be a better option. "The amnesty will not apply to those who killed, arsoned, looted. {Amnesty in BD is offered by the president, not PM like Sh. Hasina did. These doofuses first of all believed that the amnesty would have legal sanction.} "We do not spare killers. They have the record of not trying killers. "Her husband (slain president general Ziaur Rahman) did not try the killers (of August 15, 1975). "He rewarded the killers instead. He gave them diplomatic jobs."

Past killings

"What happened in 1977? How many military officers got killed?" she said, speaking of the 21 coups and counter-coups Bangladesh has witnessed in its 38-year history. "As many as 565 air force officers were killed by hanging in one incident." "So many of those who actively took part in the liberation war were killed.

US-UN help sought

The prime minister said she had already sought assistance from the US and UN to probe the BDR murders. She told parliament Sunday that she had asked a senior US official for helping with the investigation into the incidents that saw 135 army officers killed or missing. "I have had discussions with (assistant secretary of state) Richard Boucher today (Sunday). I told him I want FBI assistance in the probe," the prime minister said. "I'd also like Scotland Yard (of the UK) to help us, and I have already sought UN support," she said.

No provocations, please

The prime minister stressed that all other institutions such as the armed forces, RAB, police, Ansars, VDP must maintain discipline. "They must not respond to any provocation. They must learn from this incident," she said. "They must beware of those who wanted to benefit politically."

Monument for mutiny victims

The prime minister promised a monument to the mutiny martyrs. "All the names of those who died will be there." The families each will get Tk 10 lakh from the government, she said, in addition to the army's Tk 5 lakh. The children will get free education.

Meeting with army officers

Referring to her meeting at the Sena Kunja earlier in the day, she said she had wanted to listen. "I am an elected representative of the people, I am the prime minister, I am the defence minister, I am the daughter of the Father of Nation ... I told them I'd listen," she said of her decision to go to the Dhaka cantonment and meet hundreds of emotion-charged officers. Of the dead, she said: "Many of them were known to us. Our own relatives. Even five of my daughter's in-laws were killed."

She did not disclose what she heard during nearly three hours with the military officers, but said "what I heard there has been echoed here in parliament" in a clear reference to Khaleda Zia's statements that preceded hers.

Most of the BDR Jawaans who killed the army officers during the BDR mutiny were quite young and most of the killings were carried out and over between 10:30 to 11:00 am, immediately after the chaos started at Darbar Hall at the BDR headquarters. This eyewitness account of that fateful day came from a survivor officer, Lt. Colonel Shams, commander of Battalion-44, as he recounted what he saw in an interview published in several newspapers.

Lt Col Shams said when the Director General of BDR Shakil Ahmed was delivering his speech at the Darbar, a Jawan aimed an SMG rifle at the DG and he (Lt Col Shams) jumped up and pushed this man over, who was visibly unable to fire and was trembling as he approached the DG. As a chaos ensued, the army officers were sent out to calm down the Jawaans who had left the hall. Once outside, Lt Col Shams noticed a group of young Jawans, all firing their guns approaching the Darbar Hall from gate number 5. During the mayhem that followed, some BDR JCO from battalion 44, including Subeder Saiful, Siraj and Ismail, told Shams that the situation was out of control and helped him escape the scene, taking him to their quarters at Al Beruni Bhaban.

As he was escaping, Lt Col Shams saw a grey-coloured pick-up approaching the Darbar Hall from the gate number 5, apparently loaded with boxes of ammunition. Shams said that he had never seen such a pickup used in either the BDR or the army. By the time he had reached Al Beruni Bhaban, he could hear the sound of firing at the Darbar hall. "It was between 10:30 am to 11:00 am and I assume most of the officers were killed during that time," he said in the interview.

"The Jawans took me to their house and told me that my life would be in no danger as long as they were alive. They took off my badge and uniform and gave me clothes to wear. I hid in that house for the next two days,' the Lt Col said. "Whenever any rebelling Jawans came near the house to search, I would hide in the floor compartment of a box bed," Shams said expressing his gratitude to those who saved his life at such a time. During the evening of February 25, Shams said he saw cleaners going into the Darbar Hall with cloths and he also recalls seeing ambulances going there and he realised that these people were going to clean up the place and remove the bodies of the officers killed.

Though the rebels had at the beginning announced over microphones that they had enough ammunition to continue to fight for six months, the next morning (Thursday) they began to call on all not to misuse the bullets. Lt Col Shams said that the situation inside the BDR headquarters seemed to calm down on February 26 following the prime minister's speech that was aired on television. "The prime minister's speech worked like a wonder. The tension seemed to ease. Groups of Jawans started surrendering arms following the speech," the Lt Col said in the interview.

Shams said that most of the Jawans appeared gloomy to him, following the prime minister's speech. Shams also saw many Jawans fleeing the BDR headquarters in civil clothes on the second day of the mutiny.

Singha wrote:thank you dear lord for birthing me in assam and not 200 miles either way in BD or tibet.

Nesoj wrote:http://www.facebook.com/album.php?page= ... =691080690
Photos -
WARNING : DO NOT click link unless your prepared to see real Graphical Images

It is really sad.... one should never want this to happen to even the worst of one's enemies

RayC wrote:Gautam,
While what you write makes sense, yet realpolitik and geo strategy does not permit India to stand aloof. Even in the case of Sri Lanka, even though the Indian govt has totally backed the SL govt action, yet India has aksed for a pause (contrary to what the SL govt wants) because of realpolitik! My late maternal Uncle was an MNA in Bangladesh. His family continues to stay there, though I will confess that he is of the highest caste! They are from Gopalnagar, Pabna and I am from Barisal! I have lived in East Pakistan.

Stan_Savljevic wrote:

Avinash R wrote: This is the channel to watch for as it has good sources. Right now there is a program on the mutiny in bangladesh.

What did Aaj Tak say? Please post in the bd thread

Conspiracy theory in BDR mutiny - The Hindu

Dhaka: As the full horrors of Bangladesh Rifles mutiny unravel, a conspiracy theory is gradually taking shape with survivors and security analysts saying it was a “planned killing” aimed at “crippling” the army and BDR in a country that has just returned to democracy.

“It was a planned killing,” Army doctor Lt. Col. Abdus Salam, who survived the massacre, told reporters at the Army headquarters at a special briefing. He also asserted that only a section of the rebel soldiers was involved in the massacre.

“Never ... definitely not all of them [the rebels] were culprits. Many BDR soldiers tried to protect us [Army officers serving in BDR] risking their own lives,” he said. The 33-hour mutiny is feared to have claimed the lives of at least 135 officers.

Most security analysts, including former chiefs and Generals in unison also declined to call the massacre inside BDR headquarters “a mere mutiny”, putting their weight behind the growing fears about a conspiracy.

The analysts feared that a particular quarter chalked out the plan to kill all senior Army officers serving in the BDR as they gathered at the paramilitary force’s headquarters to celebrate the annual BDR Week. — PTI