Pravda

ANOTHER flash point appeared on the map of the globe at the beginning of this month, that of war between India and Pakistan.
The developments on the Indian subcontinent evoke anxiety among all those who cherish the cause of peace and security, the cause of emancipation of peoples waging a struggle for the right to be the masters of their future, of their destiny.
As everyone knows, it is impossible to cure an illness without arriving at the correct diagnosis. This applies not only to medicine. Without establishing the real cause for the tension in the relations between India and Pakistan, which led to an armed clash, it is impossible to settle the conflict effectively and ensure conditions for a lasting and just peace on the subcontinent.
The situation which shaped up there is stipulated by a number of factors. One of them is the nature of the political developments in Pakistan after the attainment of political independence and especially in the last few years.
Among the objective factors which engendered difficulties for Pakistan's independent development, a big part was played by the fact that 1,600 km of Indian territory lies between East and West Pakistan, with communications being effected between the two provinces mainly by air and by sea around the whole subcontinent. This circumstance is further complicated by the heterogeneity of the national composition, with Bengalis making up the overwhelming majority of the population in the east, and other national groups—Punjabis, Pushtus, Sindhis, Baluchis and several other minorities—residing in the west.

Military Rule and Economy

In 1958, following a whole series of government crises, a military grouping came into power in Pakistan. The conditions of the military regime were conducive to economic power becoming concentrated in the hands of a few industrial and financial magnates and big landowners. According to estimates drawn up by M. Haq, a Pakistani economist, 20 big monopolies in 1967 controlled 66 per cent of the whole of Pakistan's industry, 79 per cent of al the insurance funds, and 80 percent of the total sum of bank credits. It should be pointed out that they are all based in West Pakistan.
The dominance of big capital and feudal landlords in the economy and their growing influence on the political life of the country found their reflection in the intensified exploitation of the working masses and suppression of democratic liberties. Suffice it to say that the first general election in Pakistan took place only last December, 23 years after the attainment of independence. This course of political developments inside the country was taken advantage of by the imperialist states, above all by the United States, which involved Pakistan in the aggressive military blocs of SEATO and CENTO.
An upsurge was observed in Pakistan since 1968 in the activity of the masses, which demanded the democratisation of the country's political life and the promotion of an independent foreign policy. The movement assumed particularly large proportions in East Pakistan where general democratic calls were reinforced by demands for autonomy within the framework of a single state. The 75 million-strong population of East Pakistan, composed chiefly of Bengalis, regarded, with good reason, that, when effecting various kinds of socio-economic measures, the central administration did not give due attention to East Pakistan, and sometimes there were cases of discrimination in relation to that province. This discrimination assumed most diverse forms, ranging from cuts in allocations for the needs of economic development of East Pakistan to discrimination in the political sphere: access was practically closed for the Bengalis to top posts both in the state apparatus and in the army.
Under pressure of the mass movement the Government of Pakistan held elections to Parliament and local legislative bodies in December last year. The election results showed that the most influential political party in the country is the East Pakistani Awami League headed by Mujibur Rahman. The League won 167 of the 317 seats in Parliament, and 288 of the 310 seats in the Legislative Assembly of East Pakistan. In this way the people of East Pakistan clearly came out for the party's programme demanding broad autonomy, democratisation of public life and the pursuance of an independent foreign policy.

Atmosphere of Terror

It should be stressed that the League's programme documents contained no clause about granting East Pakistan state independence. This demand came from below in the course of the mass actions in response to the mass repression to which the Government resorted in order to impose its will upon the absolute majority of the people of East Pakistan. The proclamation by the Awami League of an independent Bangla Desh in East Pakistan reflected the indignation of the people over the policy of the ruling circles, which proved incapable of ensuring normal political development, over the policy of the Government, which trampled upon the elementary human rights of the population of East Pakistan. It is very important to note also the scale of repressions to which the Pakistani authorities resorted against the people in East Pakistan. In the course of the punitive operations artillery, tanks and aircraft were used against the unarmed population. Whole villages were wiped out and the inhabitants were shot. The religious and fanatical parties and organisations, voted down in the elections. used the atmosphere of terror to settle accounts with their political opponents and to take vengeance for their defeat.
It is hard to determine the scale of the tragedy that befell the people of East Pakistan as a result of the short-sighted policy of the Government. Some foreign observers who visited the areas of East Pakistan during the punitive operations estimate the number of victims at several hundred thousands. How can one measure the suffering of millions of refugees forced to seek shelter and protection in neighbouring India!

Soviet Warning

The Soviet Union, in conformity with the principles of its foreign policy, invariably supports the struggle of peoples for their liberation. Guided by considerations of humaneness the Soviet Union repeatedly appealed to the Government of Pakistan to stop repressions and seek ways for a political settlement of the crisis. In taking this step the Soviet Government drew the attention of the Pakistani leaders to the danger to peace on the subcontinent their actions were fraught with.
The military suppression of the will of the people was met with armed resistance on their part. Detachments of the people's liberation army (Mukti Bahini) launched guerilla operations against the government troops. This is how a tense situation arose on the Indo-Pakistani border in spring this year. Only the Pakistani Government was capable of relaxing the tension by rejecting the military settlement of the political crisis and fulfilling the will of its people.
The restraint and self-possession displayed by the Indian Government under these conditions deserve acclaim. Until the very last moment it refrained from the steps which might hamper a political settlement in East Pakistan. India recognised Bangla Desh only after the armed forces of Pakistan began large military actions against India in the West on December 3 and bombed 12 Indian airports.
India repeatedly stated that the refugee problem had been caused by the policy and activity of the Pakistani military authorities who had unleashed terror against the population of East Pakistan.
By their anti-Indian propaganda the United States and the Peking leadership encouraged the Pakistani leaders in their anti-popular actions. After the conflict broke out the Peking leaders, in fact, stooped to alliance with American imperialism and acted as open enemies of the East Pakistani people struggling for their liberation.
While the US representative in the UN Security Council supports the Pakistani leaders, the US Government exerts crude pressure upon India. It declared an end to its economic aid to India, the warships of the 7th Fleet have entered the Bay of Bengal and are near the Indian subcontinent.
In this situation the ceasefire proposals ignoring the causes of the conflict cannot bring about a genuine peace. They in no way facilitate a normalisation of the situation on the Indian subcontinent, justify, directly or otherwise, the actions taken by the Pakistani authorities that are responsible for the present conflict, and do an ill-turn to the peoples of the Indian subcontinent suffering such a severe trial.
The peoples of India and Pakistan want peace to solve the problems of their national economic development, raise their living standards and combat poverty, unemployment and price increase. The military conflict aggravates these problems. Official spokesmen of the Indian. Government have reiterated that India has no territorial claims to Pakistan. This once again shows that an effective solution of the conflict and a lasting peace on the Indian subcontinent cannot be achieved unless there is a political settlement in East Pakistan with the lawful rights and interests of the East Pakistani people taken into account.
All who prize peace, all friends of the peoples of India and Pakistan should do their utmost to find a realistic way of ending the conflict on that basis and to frustrate the plans of those who tend to fan the flames of war and perpetuate tension between these countries in order to meet their mercenary interests.
(Pravda, December 16, 1971)