Military action in East Pakistan
From Dr S. Sajjad Husain and Dr M. Mohar Ali
Sir, We are surprised to discover that many people in Great Britain have the impression that a large number of Bengali intellectuals, including university teachers, were deliberately killed by the Pakistan Arny on March 25-26, and subsequently. Even Pakistani students living in London who have been away from home for more than a year have confused ideas about the situation in East Pakistan. One of them came to us to inquire whether he could safely return home without any risk of being immediately arrested and shot.

When asked why he harboured such fears he could only repeat the stories he had heard about the “massacre” of the intellectuals at Dacca. He mentioned a story which had appeared in The Sunday Times of June 20, in which Mr Munim of the English Department in the University of Dacca was described as having been shot dead on March 25. We told him that we had spoken to Mr Munim ourselves on June 13 on the eve of our departure for London and that he was very much alive.

This story about Mr Munim seems typical of the atrocity stories circulating abroad. To be told that no civilian Bengali population could be seen in the streets of Dacca today, as one new paper did, indeed must come as a surprise to any East Pakistani who has been in East Pakistan throughout the recent disturbances. To have to answer inquiries about friends and colleagues believed dead is painful. But it is not surprising that such stories should continue to sustain the wholly baseless impression that life was not safe for any Bengali, particularly an educated Bengali, in the towns and villages of East Pakistan.

In the first place it is necessary to point out that there has been no “massacre” of the intellectuals. No teacher was killed at Raishahi or Chittagong universities on March 25 or later. The number of teachers at Dacca University who are known to have lost their lives in the fighting around Iqbal and Jagannath Halls on March 25-26 is nine. This is certainly most unfortunate and regrettable. But these colleagues of ours would not have died if armed members of the Awami League volunteer corps had not used the buildings in which they lived and the neighbourhood as a base for their operations against the army. One of our colleagues, a personal friend of ours, Dr Guha-Thakurta. who died in hospital three days later of the wounds he had received on March 25, told his friends before his death that he would not have been wounded had student volunteers (affiliated to the Awami League) not entered the building in which he lived.

Secondly, it is not generally known that all colleges and universities having been ordered closed by the Awami league on March 3. as part of their non-cooperation movement, there were few students living in the halls of residence on March 25 either at Dacca or at Rajshahi. At Rajshahi they all dispersed to their homes between March 3 and March 7. Iqbal Hall and Jagannath Hall at Dacca University had been turned into arsenals by Awami League volunteers, but very few students slept in their rooms during those weeks in March. The story we were told here of 50 women students in Ruqayya Hall jumping from a window to their death to escape molestation al the hands of the Pakistan Army is pure fantasy. Not one woman student was in Ruqayya Hall on the night of March 25. The truth can be easily ascertained by writing to the provosts of those halls.

Conditions in March before the army intervened had been completely anarchical. There was no security for any one, particularly for those who had not lined up with the Awami League. University teachers, both at Dacca and Rajshahi, who were regarded as “dissenters” by the Awami League were subjected to relentless pressure and intimidation by Awami League workers. The names of some were published in the Awami League controlled newspapers in East Pakistan with the warning that they would be punished for their refusal to support the Awami League programme and its ideology.

At Rajshahi in the first week of April, and before the arrival of the army on April 13, repeated attempts were made to liquidate teachers who did not subscribe to the Awami League philosophy The non-Bengali teachers were put under house arrest and spared only on the basis of a written guarantee by one of us as the Vice-Chancellor and some senior Bengali professors that they would not leave the campus. It is quite certain that if the Pakistan Army had not put an end to this reign of terror many of these university teachers would have been killed.

Yours faithfully.
S. SAJJAD HUSAIN. Vice-Chancellor, Rajshahi University.
M. MOHAR ALL Reader in History, Dacca University.
Royal Garden Hotel.
High Street. Kensington. W8.

---

From Mrs Rasheeda Rehman
Sir. Mr James Tinn’s letter (July 3) is a dramatic illustration of its heading “Over-simplification in Pakistan”. Indeed it is a faithful precis of General Yahya’s broadcasts to the nation repeated frequently after March 25 so that the people should be properly made aware of their transgressions.

The theme is this—despite unprecedented efforts made by an army Government to hand over io civilian rule, the politicians themselves were unable to reach agreement so the army had to “intervene”. This intervention was of necessity accompanied by acts of violence, but then there had been acts of violence by civilians against civilians as well. Thus minus plus minus equals plus. Let us all now start again. Democracy must be restored, of course, and so it will be provided people vote for the right persons.

What has impressed Mr Tinn is “Yahya Khan’s record of deeds up to the breakdown of talks”. Two points have to be made here—first, these talks had to be held because Yahya Khan had broken his undertaking to hold the National Assembly and had postponed sine die its sitting; and, secondly, it is disputed that the talks did, in fact, break down. Throughout the talks the Awami League was given to understand that there was no substantial objection to their six-point programme provided Mr Bhutto could be “accommodated”. Then, having lulled the Awami League into a false sense of security, and having got in enough troops for the job, Yahya declared that the talks had broken down, and flew out of Dacca having ordered his army to strike “pre-emptively”—a useful euphemism in modem political jargon for aggression.

I also do not understand why Mr Tinn should have had the impression that a religious conflict was taking place in East Pakistan. Vested interests in West Pakistan are seeking to break the nationalist—and secular—aspirations of the people in East Pakistan. Since even the army has to have some rationale for butchering its own compatriots it is West Pakistani propaganda that is turning this info a Hindu-Muslim India-Pakistan conflict.

This is incidentally why so little publicity has been given to the so-called Bengali atrocities against non-Bengalis. True the refugees fleeing to India are predominantly Hindu but that is simply because the unfortunate Bengali Muslim has nowhere to flee. The Hindus of East Pakistan can expect their co-religionists across the border to shelter them; the Muslims of Bengal, except for a lucky few are trapped. I might add that they are considerably less impressed than Mr Tinn by Yahya Khan's forthright personality, having had perhaps, more experience of it.

Two other points. No one can feel proud of or justify any acts of violence committed by Bengalis against non-Bengalis merely because they were non-Bengali. And certainly there have been such acts but there is a difference—admittedly not to the victims—between mob violence and genocide. Further I hope that Mr Tinn will not feel that because a few courageous souls might have dared to criticize the government to him there is freedom of speech and freedom from fear of reprisal for free speech in Pakistan. As a recent refugee from Bengal I speak from personal knowledge.

It would seem that Mr Tinn has fallen victim to the excellent propaganda machine that served Ayub Khan so admirably from 1958-64, and had journalists and MPs lauding the achievements of the Ayub regime along with his “bluff soldierly personality”. Bengal’s only hope for the future is that others should not be similarly deceived. Yours sincerely.
RASHEEDA REHMAN,
50 Clarendon Road. Wil.
July 4