Untold Facts

Awami League Manifesto 2008: Unearthing a Poisonous Cobra

The Awami League has made public its election manifesto for December 29 election. The party chief Sheikh Hasina did it on the 12th December in Dhaka in a selected gathering.

There are many lofty promises therein as many knew from the list of 23 issues, just 2 more than the historic 21 point of the then Jukto Front of which the AL had been a component in early 1950s as the election pledge for early 1954 polls, as this time the first priority being reduction of prices of essential items like rice, pulses, oil etc. to the level of purchasing power of the common poor people not specifying though to what exact price tag.

There would certainly be some praises and some condemnation of the 23 promises they made. In this brief item I intend to deal with only one problem in the question of trial of the so-called ‘war criminals’. The issue was picked up by them about the subject that occurred in 1971, thirty eight years ago in the highest pitch of confusion and controversy. The time elapsed is tipped here not for anything else but for difficulty involved in reality to do right of any wrong.

The first point, one must appreciate and take cognizance of, is that war crime is recognized as such in matters of actual engagement between opponent armies in actual war. The Bangladesh 1971 war happened in fact to be the specified war between combatant armed forces of India and Pakistan during the 14 days engagements of the 3rd December to the16th. So far as the 14 days war was concerned, the first three days war until 6th December was aggression of India against the sovereignty of Pakistan for the very simple reason that India did not recognize Bangladesh as an independent country until that day. Appreciating these facts of historical truth, one can stand for trial of war criminal at best during these two weeks period, if in case the combatants of the either side violated human rights of any civilian, not of any combatant force engaged in actual fight during engagements.

Civilians were known to have violated human rights in some cases that can not be termed as war crime, and such violations were there but not on one side but from both sides of the political divide of 1971, one group for independence of Bangladesh and the other for preserving the unity and sovereignty of Pakistan. That is why after the so-called collaborators act had run into fiasco, the 195 listed armed forces war criminals had been let free by the Government, they formed a tribunal to try the civilian human rights violators during the anarchic period of 1971. But the other reality came up that such violations had been perpetrated from both sides and the evil acts went on not only from one side of the ideological divide. Though the victors tried to take all in misusing and witch hunting by the brute force of the so called collaborators act of 1972 during 1972 and early 1973, the same advantage was soon lost, and the pro-federalist elements were freed, and in many cases rehabilitated with honor.

As the promise now made for trial of ‘war criminals’ afresh, one can not but be reasonably skeptical if the situation is similar to 1973 when operation of the tribunal was abandoned for enormous difficulties or if it is more favorable to put the violators, if any traceable and alive, to justice.

The issue of continuing relation between Pakistan and Bangladesh is not a mean one. Can Bangladesh risk the fraternal relations with that country developed during the last three decades? Can Bangladesh take the risk of being cornered at the forum of the OIC?

As are known to the knowledgeable circles, Bangladesh had to wait long three and a half years to start to mend relation not only with China but also with Saudi Arabia and its close Muslim allies that had the main stake of relation with Pakistan and Islamic ideology. Should Bangladesh go for pressing the issue, could that be at all palatable with all these countries?  Could not the nearly two million of Bangladeshis now employed in Saudi Arab and around in Muslim countries alone face difficulties  in their life and living there and sustenance of their families at home, in case relation with Saudi Arab is dented for picking up the issue here afresh.

There is no doubt that some determined sons of the soil fought for and brought independence of Bangladesh in 1971. That reality, however, did not mean that the supreme leader Sheikh Mujib either did declare the independence war or led his own army to fight to victory in 1971. On the contrary, the real truth of the matter is that he declined to secede from united Pakistan even at the height of the tension in early 1971 and chose instead to surrender to the Federal army to preserve united Pakistan (See, Impact International, London, 25th September, 1987; S. Wolpert’s Zulfi Bhutto of Pakistan, 1993, p.175; Sarder M. Choudhury’s The Ultimate Crime, 1999, P.98, etc.).

During his surrender on the 25th March night in 1971 he left no message for the people but only in utter confusion to decide their own destiny in anarchic situation and fighting between themselves, one group identifying right then as the Bangladeshis and the other as the Pakistanis as before. He however, left a feeble and confusing message through one of his lieutenant Tajuddin to keep on ‘struggling’ and enforcing the ‘shut down on the 27th March’. The other instruction he had for use and misuse of stick or Lathi that unfortunately some foolish ones did only to get crushed  in shelling of the armies with modern weapons  that engaged themselves to restore order and discipline in the streets of Dhaka on he 25th March night of 1971. Could the leader Sheikh shark off burden for abetting such foolish acts of the simple minded folks who all unfortunately believed the leader as the demi-god? One must wonder thus at the sagacity of the framers of the election manifesto of AL 2008, particularly in this matter for including therein the so-called trial of the ‘war criminals’, really a missed opportunity, wherein the great late Sheikh could hardly be immune from.

One may thus wonder if the issue has been picked up and put to the list of promises of the manifesto only to dig out a poisonous cobra for nothing but to risk a poisonous bite of it. The other crucial matter is that in the scenario of ‘forget and forgive’ announced in 1973 by the great Sheikh for the 195 listed war criminal, putting now afresh some civilians of the vanquished alone, none of the victors, who stood for their own belief and conscience to save the integrity of their own beloved country, even the UN could pursue for anything in the matter.

Dr. M.T. Hussain