FROM JINNAH’S PAKISTAN TO NOWHERE?

Samson Simon Sharaf

This article was written immediately after the assassination of Salman Taseer in January 2011. Back then everyone tended to shy away but the editor of Nation showed character by publishing it. With slight modifications, this is a reproduction.

Ever since, the print media and socio-political landscape of Pakistan has gone from bad to worse. The Nation newspaper is no more the same. Just a question.  Who runs the Nazaria-i-Pakistan Trust once headed by Late Majid Nizami?

That day, I had a discussion with Imran Khan. We agreed that forces of evil were taking over Pakistan. Perhaps we were the only ones who came out openly on media in Salman’s favour. Much later the courts acquitted Salman Taseer posthumously and the assassin was hanged to death. Though justice ultimately prevailed, nothing changed. At that time the world was shaken for Aasia Bibi because it suited them. Now it shakes and moves no more.

Like most Pakistanis, I was stunned by disbelief to see the breaking news of the late Salman Taseer’s assassination; Not that I am a fan but rather the direction in which Pakistan headed. Like every citizen, who still clung to Jinnah’s vision, I was disturbed and saddened by events that followed.

None could have articulated the direction that Pakistan headed, better than Imran Khan. In his interview to CNN he related this unfortunate event into cause and effect, “In fact Pakistan is imploding. This country is going down.” Rather than his usual dynamic and imposing demeanour, he appeared tense, grim and sombre; his face reminiscent of the first loosing matches of 1992 world cup reflected the concerns of every Pakistani: “Betrayal of Jinnah’s vision of a plural, progressive and communitarian society”. 13 years hence, he was right to the core.

The purpose of this article was not to write an obituary on Salman Taseer, but something far greater and of enduring significance: assess what lies ahead for Pakistan and in appraising the future course of Pakistan’s politic body. Hours after the assassination, I formulated a hypothesis and posted it on Facebook and Twitter. As Events have unfolded thereafter, my worst fears came true.

“Salman’s assassination is beyond symbolic. This is the start point of a struggle between the forces that bank on the establishment and mullahs for power and the true democratic forces within Pakistan. Does it bring to an end to the era of the Punjab Progressives like Faiz, Mian Iftikhar and Dr. Taseer, or will the pyre burn?”

Indeed, since that tragic day, Pakistan’s politics has taken a turn for the worst.

During the entire run up to the assassination, all political parties distanced themselves from the slain governor and left him alone with few civil activists, minority leaders and opinion makers. Even the ruling PPP hierarchy like Prime Minister and Babar Awan publicly distanced itself from the slain governor .

A large segment of the Rawalpindi Bar Association put its weight behind the assassin, garlanded, kissed and hugged him.

The governments in power at provincial and federal levels failed to take action against those who justified the assassination on religious grounds or offering head money on those condemned under PPC 295C.

The internet media flooded with admiration of the assassin. Facebook had numerous profiles and communities portraying him a knight.

Like the assassinations from Lt. Gen Iftikhar and PM Liaqat Ali in 1951, to the plane crash of the Chief Investigator of his murder, to Gen Zia Ul Haq’s crash to BB’s Murder in 2007, the security apparatus showed its low motivational state, lack of training and commitment and security of VVIPs.

Did all this happen overnight?

The story began with Jinnah’s plural Pakistan which was systematically replaced with political manipulations of religion to sustain the emerging political elites and the establishment. It began when Jinnah was abandoned on the roads of Karachi grasping for fresh air followed by insertion of the religious identity in the constitution. Religious forces that opposed the creation of Pakistan and supported the Khilafat Movement under Gandhi slowly began to overawe the Muslim League that created Pakistan and opposed the Khilafat. As time passed, numerous Muslim Leagues that were created to suit the establishments dishonoured Jinnah’s Pakistan and proceeded into short term expediencies that have now resulted in intolerance, violence and lawlessness.

As this trend spread, many members of the minority communities who worked in cahoots with Qaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah elected to either move back to India or to other countries. Even many war heroes who served Pakistan in its two wars emigrated.

Similarly, the uprisings in Kashmir had the intellectual, military and political inputs from men like Faiz Ahmad Faiz, Mian Iftikharuudin of Progressive Papers Lahore and Dr. Taseer. Pathetically, these heroes of the Kashmir struggle were thrown into cages by the dictators for conspiring against Kashmir and we in schools were forbidden from reading Faiz’ poetry. In yet another Shakespearean irony, a man who earned and paid honest taxes to Pakistan in its worst times, and one who turned anything he touched in business to gold and whose father acclaimed and buried Ghazi Alim ud Din in Lahore, himself fell to bullets and was labelled an infidel.

Pakistan was chosen as an Islamic Containment Bulwark against a so-called godless Russia during the Cold War.  USA called Pakistan to an international Jihad against the infidel Soviets during the occupation of Afghanistan. The West and many Arab stated created the sectarian outfits to fail Iran’s Revolution. Tragically, at each occasion military dictators seeking legitimacy obliged and plunged Pakistan deeper into the militant syndrome. The present WOT serves to air and ignite these violent trends with the conclusion that any moderate who speaks up for Jinnah’s Vision is called an enemy agent, infidel, and traitor.

Are we headed towards a reassertion of our hard earned freedom or still consider ourselves as an indispensable ally, Ayub Khan called, “Friend not Masters”?

Jinnah’s Pakistanis has already lost space and slogan of Naya Pakistan is an anathema.

WHERE ARE WE?

Samson Simon Sharaf

Warfare till mid-20th century was tri-dimensional on land, air and sea. Intelligence operations supported conventional warfare. Psychological operations were limited in scope, tiring in execution, had propaganda content that focused on breaking the will of the adversary. Use of fifth columnists and spies behind enemy lines faded away.

During the Cold War, intelligence operations assumed significant importance. Technology reduced reliance on manpower while ‘Real Time Information’ deprived decision makers of the luxury of a time lag.

This necessitated formation of decision-making structures to reduce clutter and increase cognitive controls. Hence despite being part of global dynamics, did Pakistan miss two new dimensions of conflict management; the integrated battle space and the virtual battle field? This meant an exponentially expanded battle space and capability of the ‘other’ to wrest control of hearts and minds.

Hence ideological frontiers shrunk and multiple internal fronts opened. This dimension of warfare warranted Reorganisation of Battle Lines on the Cognitive Front. The dimension besides profiling organisations and individuals also collects information that is collated and animated to create psycho-social fissures. This warfare no longer needs a declaration. It is right there in the office desktop, laptop, smart phone and kitchen.

Much has been written on 5^th Generation Warfare and forms part of the tutorial scripts, which is now archaic. Despite induction of latest kinetic and informational technologies, the 5^th Generation Warfare is overtaken.

“An archer letting off an arrow may or may not kill a single man, but a wise man using his intellect can kill even reaching into the very womb,” 

Vishnugupta Chanakya Kautilya

Pakistan’s fault lines run through the seams.

Political instability, poor economics, degraded social-economics, parochialism, sub-nationalism, militancy, influence of Arab and Western value systems, cash flows; three tier education streams, political cartels, business cabals, human rights records, ethnicity, civil rights groups and marginalisation of minorities all provide a happy hunting ground for gold hunters.

Pakistan with its divisive politic body and divergent narratives is most vulnerable to virtual warfare. When the state does not enjoy credence, where non-state actors spew contrarian narratives and where too many fault lines exist, it is a feast for sophisticated cyber warriors and political backdoors to shape and control an environment.  (For more details, please read the full article in Nation https://www.nation.com.pk/07-Feb-2015/the-virtual-war ).

My conclusions were based on the situational context of Pakistan on internal and external fronts and how Pakistan was erring in sizing the situation.

Pakistan’s prevailing geopolitical, regional and internal situation did not evolve overnight. Environment began shaping right after withdrawal of Soviet Union. Exasperation and vulnerability increased manifold. Then it was Kalashnikovs and drugs, now it is everything.

Tragically, Pakistan ignored its building blocks of national power premised on Jinnah’s and Creed of Muslim League Values and elements of power to expediencies and lack of mid/long term national goals. 

For Pakistan, the obvious counter action was to intelligently break away from the Southern Front (last containment ring of Cold War), which is a reflection of poor governance, proliferation of contending Islamic ideologies and social conflicts. Arab Springs, Libya, Yemen, Iraq, Syria manifest the Southern Front Policy. I cautioned repeatedly that Pakistan must avoid slipping into a Global Balkan and must open new economic and diplomatic fronts towards Eurasia and BRI. I wrote, addressed Think Tanks and talked in universities. (For details read https://www.nation.com.pk/07-Sep-2019/pakistan-a-global-balkan). The alternative to Pakistan’s Quest for Survival was never fruitful.

To reinforce my thesis, I wrote, spoke and lectured on subjects like ‘The Devil’s Triangle’ arguing that events in Middle East, Ukraine and Pakistan-Afghanistan are interlinked in a new form of warfare to which Pakistan could be reduced to a pliable state. A pinch in Ukraine or Ladakh would have an effect in Pakistan.

Despite remarkable cunning to exploit its space in great power rivalry and survive, Pakistan’s political and military establishments never learnt the art of state craft to build a nation state. It is this adaptable learning curve and the instincts to survive therein that could decide the role Pakistan plays in the devil’s triangle. Unfortunately, Pakistan chose to reinforce the past. (For more details read The Devils Triangle https://www.nation.com.pk/22-Mar-2014/the-devil-s-triangle).

The rapid rise of China as a global economic and technical giant followed by its outreach policy threatened to perforate the Southern Front. If successful, the entire line from Crimea to Pakistan and Bangladesh to Myanmar and Malaysia would be dominated by China backed by Russia and the fringes. Eurasia would then become the world’s strongest economic, resource rich and biggest Islamic Bloc. Analysts summed this as the Asian Century; Hence my thesis, ‘The End of Geostrategy‘.

Pakistan’s war for survival is as old as the containment. “Seek Peace with Pride, but if ABSOLUTISM strikes, be prepared for the Last Battle”. (Please read my article and lectures on the subject https://www.nation.com.pk/20-Jan-2018/the-end-of-geostrategy?show=744 ).

Perhaps the epitome of my research on the subject was my argument that beyond the 5^th Generation Warfare, countries like Pakistan are vulnerable to a new dynamic, I named as 6^th Generation Warfare. The Think Tanks and Universities were quick to pounce on it but rejected it without falsification.  

Fifth generation warfare entered a phase beyond common understanding; a hybrid zone towards the sixth generation, beyond the six levels known a decade back. This development bypassed the balance imposed by nuclear deterrence, introduced a new form of Compellence, war by remote control, standoffs and subversion. Countries dependent on foreign military hardware, microbiology and technologies would face serious limitations if dragged into such conflicts. Pakistan was most vulnerable.

Compellence was a strategy coined by Thomas Schelling to refer to the ability of a credible military capability forcing a country to change its policies. It has expanded to all forms of intimidation and coercion by a stronger state against a weaker to submit whilst retaining some advantage without being crippled. Political economy is an essential part of this strategy. Pakistan is a classic example of compellence under US pressure. Pakistan retained its fighting and nuclear capabilities; yet succumbed to US pressures, drone strikes and sanctions.

In this new form of compellence, the social dimension of strategy is being exploited by technology, political economy, war by remote, stand-off strikes, cyber warfare, malware, spywares, firewalls, backdoors, political instability, political engineering and subversion of law. In a worse case, like the noble Brutus, the State could resort to eating into itself like self-cannibalism. (Please read my articles, lectures and blogs on the subject https://www.nation.com.pk/19-Jul-2020/sixth-generation-warfare )

After the lows in Ladakh and Pakistani strikes inside Indian Occupied Kashmir, India was left off the hook. It wasn’t a sudden change but follow up of policies that began in 2007. Since then, India has moved leaps and bounds in its international alliances, economics, technology, human resource development and power projection while Pakistan has continuously receded. Compare any index on the scale and conclusions are disheartening. In international politics, ‘only the weak and fickle run with the hare and hunt with the hounds’.

After the humiliation of Pakistan’s delegation led by Bilawal Zardari in India, India has come full throttle against Pakistan during the recent visit to USA. Indian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister have addressed Pakistan in most derogatory expressions and adjectives. Yet there is no credible reaction from Pakistan.

The most intimidatory statement has come from Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on the floor of University of Jammu. “India is not the same as it used to be. It is getting more powerful. If needed, India can hit on this side of the border and can go across the border as well”. In the same vein, he has also called out China.

A learned commentator on India commented, “Once states become cannibalistic from within, the enemies laugh, enjoy, threaten and humiliate. The words of Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh indicate coming trouble in AJK and possibly GB. Those who can look beyond the media’s blackout, know that trouble has started”.

While Pakistan is bleeding and consumed by 6^th Generation Warfare, India makes merry in the Indo-Pacific Military Alliance. BRICS, SCO. Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) and many other bilateral agreements. USA and its allies need a bigger and stronger India to take China head-on in Indo-Pacific Military alliance and CENTCOM. Therefore, while Pakistan descends into ungovernability and instability, the Indian alliances prepare for the coup de grace.

Having written consistently on the theme for over two decades, it is inconceivable that successive governments and security apparatus have failed to read the script. Else, why would Pakistan have walked willingly into a quagmire against the aspirations of its people?  

The recent events in Russia regarding the Wagner mercenary boss Yevgeny Prigozhin is a continuation of the policy to gobble and digest nation states from within. Activities of Russian, Ukrainian and Central Asian oligarchs with their ill gotten wealth is stashed in western safe heavens. Same is the case of most oligarchs from unstable states in the world including Pakistan. These are not agents of change for for the betterment of countries they looted, rather stashed in western domains as agents of subversion of their respective motherland. It worked in Ukraine and is being imposed in Pakistan. This is the most lethal aspect of 6th Generation Warfare.

I recall 2007, when I warned President General Musharraf that imposing emergency is akin to constitutional procedures in an operation theatre by butchers. Though he disagreed, later he gracefully relented. History will record him as one defending his Post that is Pakistan.

“If you know yourself and know your enemy, you need not dead the result of thousand battles”, Sun Tzu in ‘Art of War’.  

The Social Dimension is hardest hit. Every Pakistani has to rise above themselves. Get into an intellectual huddle even with those that are despised and resort to free, fair and transparent elections as a first step to break out of this trap. Do not muse on Remains of the Day, rather collect the building blocks and mesh them together.

COMPANY BAHADUR SYNDROME

A painting depicting an official of the East India Company (1760)

Samson Simon Sharaf

Clive had convinced himself that the Company’s trade in Bengal could only be truly safe when Siraj had been dethroned and replaced by a puppet….Clive was abetted by two colleagues….men of quick wit and elastic conscience who acted as emissaries to Siraj….Siraj grudgingly agreed to make peace in February….Large Afghan forces were operating in Punjab and might strike into South East…and he was glad to hear that the Company were now his friend and would come to his rescue…..Siraj had been gulled.

             Lawrence James, Raj: The Making and Unmaking of British India

Clive’s war of mercantilism was supported by treacherous local money men, greedy beneficiaries and ambitious Mir Jaffar. Extortions, gratifications, dossiers, blackmailing and money were the name of the game.

True to the methodology of colonialism and imperialism, this was how in 1757, the East India Company secured Bengal and later India. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

If anyone has any doubts on how political absolutism and neo imperialism work, read the account of how Bengal and rest of sub-continent was won. It is a shameful tale of greed, deceit, narrow self-interests, degenerative societies and most importantly, strategic miscalculations of the target.

Come 2023 and the litany and methodology are no different.

Political stability has evaded Pakistan since 1947. Bureaucratic intrigues, repeated military interventions and exclusion of popular governments have fortified the role of elite manifold. Governments are toppled to ensure that Pakistan’s political clock clocks what they want..

According to Rafay Alam, “There has been no revolutionary exertion of rights in this part of the world”.

Similarly, Late Dr Mubashir Hassan made slanted references to this invisible force capable of paralysing political governments.

The State of the Pakistan did not acquire a fresh personality at birth and instead, inherited the worst possible colonial mindset, “The Company Bahadur Syndrome”.

The Legislative Act of 1935 enacted by a country with an unwritten constitution was extremely detailed with punctuated ‘safeguards designed to allow the colonial mindset to intervene whenever it deemed fit in its own interests. A one sided social contract between the master and native. Both India and Pakistan adopted the 1935 Act as a provisional constitution.

It would make an interesting case study why India and Pakistan arising out of the same colonialism followed different routes to political and constitutional development and why one defied imperial logic whilst the other complied.

In Pakistan, there never was any supreme policy based on the values of Unity Faith and Discipline enunciated by Qaid E Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Meanwhile interventions, coups and constitutional crises continued; legitimised by the generic term of national interests akin to imperial interests of 1935. At every step, constitutionalism became a convenient casualty to the notion of necessity. Personal and institutional auras eclipsed the rule of law.

The pursuance of strategic interests through economic, foreign and military policies has always remained a subject of interest for political economists; not for the aggressive powers seeking domination but rather, the simplicity in the method of execution and willingness of the vulnerable to be manipulated for a pittance. A glance at the South American bubble economies and political instability repeatedly reflects such narratives and events: reason why I have always emphasised studying the Latin American Models.  Pakistan has learnt no lessons.

Pakistan in sharp contrast to both India and China has willingly made itself vulnerable and disadvantaged in an extremely significant strategic environment. A nuclear country with abundant natural resources, manpower, and potential allowing itself to be subdued so easily speaks volumes about the mindset and moorings of those who call shots.

Writing in 2019, I observed that notwithstanding tactical military successes in FATA, Pakistan is ultimately positioned to loose on the larger canvas. A cohesive national policy needed to win such a conflict remains elusive. The government rather than strengthen and synergise other instruments of policy in tandem with military operations is hell-bent to reach an irretrievable position. Beset by poor governance, lack of transparency, rising poverty and inflation, the streets of Pakistan are likely to implode. As the anger of people grows to frustration, it will give way to violence, chaos and more militancy. Regime Change Operation ratifies my hypothetical scenario made 13 years ago.

Strange Bills contrary to Constitution of Pakistan and benefitting a pliable segment are being passed. FIRs and high handedness without judicial oversight is escalating. As the scenario unfolds, the hands are opening on the table.

The mindset of 1935 haunts Pakistan like a ghost with many lives. It is singularly responsible for Pakistan’s political, geographical, and constitutional crises till today. The Thakurs are positioning for the final battle.

As Imran Khan travels to Islamabad in many of the many summons against him, the country is on tenterhooks, the explosive magma is building up. One wrong move and the boil could overflow the brim.

As Paulo Coelho wrote in The Alchemist, “”The secret of life though is to fall seven times and to get up eight times”. The public synergy and outcry indicate that Pakistan is ready to rise the eighth and final time.

Note: Most excerpts are from my articles published in 2010

THE PAKISTAN THAT WAS

KNIGHTS, NIGHTS AND NATIVES

PART V

Samson Simon Sharaf

Here are some chilling events that took place from March to May 1971.

Shiekh Mujib was arrested and moved to a safe house. The Bengali Intelligence Station Chief had defected. The responsibility fell on the shoulders of Col Maqsood. The officer narrated a word-to-word account of those fateful days. Mujib was awed by the violent tide of Bengali Nationalism. He insisted he was for decentralization. His appeal to calm events was declined. Col Maqsud communicated the briefs and recordings but could not get beyond the general staff at GHQ. On 23 March 1971, he gave a briefing to the PPP team headed by Bhutto that fell on deaf ears.

With top tier of leadership arrested, the surge of Bengali Nationalism fell into the hands of situational leaders many of whom were retired or revolting officers of the armed forces. The slogan of ‘Idhar Hum Udhar Tum’ provided the impetus to the separatist surge. There were reports of ethnic killings in Chittagong, Santahar and Sylhet. Bengali servicemen of East Bengal Regimental Centre, East Bengal Regiments and East Pakistan Rifles were leading the charge. They selectively killed non Bengali servicemen, families and children.

Lt General Rao Farman who was handling civil affairs could not convince GHQ and General Yaya’s Martial Law coterie. Bhutto had now become an integral advisor. Lt Gen Tikka who was to later become Bhutto’s Chief was moved to East Pakistan and so began Operation Searchlight. Landing in West Pakistan, Bhutto said, “Pakistan is saved”. It meant, ‘West Pakistan is rid of East Pakistan.’

Based on a premise that defence of East lies in the West, army was very thinly deployed. Further, most Bengali servicemen had joined the mutineers. Military and establishment structure was proliferated with informers. The nature of terrain impeded rapid movements. The field army completely disconnected from the ruling coterie had no idea of the challenges it had to face in the war it had to fight.

The ruling coterie had concentric circles.

They were led by Yaya’s Martial Law advisors and civil opportunist. With Lt General Rahim’s liaison, Bhutto became an integral part of this group advocating a bulwark approach.

Senior officers in East Pakistan bypassed General Staff at GHQ and started taking direct orders from the martial law camp. Some officers resigned or were ousted. Amongst them were Lt. General Yaqub Ali Khan, Major General Shaukat Reza and Major General Khadim Hussain Raja. Lt. Gen Farman who initially favoured a civilian settlement trimmed his sails.

An extension of this coterie led by Lt General Niazi also existed in East Pakistan.

Two things were common amongst this delusional lot; women and whisky. They made merry and were not available at critical times. Some even confided to their ‘women of the nights’ that East Pakistan had to go and India would give a safe passage to West Pakistani army. In light of Hamood ur Rehman Commission Report, this lot needs to be court martialed even if posthumously.

It was assumed that because Pakistan had suppressed leftist movements in East Pakistan to appease USA in the past, this one would be acceptable. This decision proved fatal because of multiple factors.

International opinion quickly went against Pakistan.

USA failed to call the bluff of Soviet nuclear submarines and retracted.

Lastly, Tibetan insurgents trained by CIA were drafted as the hardcore of Mukti Bahini into the civil war by India in the interim. They formed the first wave of violence and genocide in Chittagong. Later India openly drafted and trained Mukti Bahini, a fact admitted by Prime Minister Modi in Bangladesh.

Second circle was led by Chief of General Staff at GHQ. They were intermittently in and out of the loop. There was no war planning, application of military contingencies and variants. Offence in West Pakistan was ill conceived and failed. By 7 December, Pakistan army in the west had lost initiative and Indian forces were reacting. The entire military high command was paralyzed when the surrender took place. Facing a military rebellion, General Yahya was forced to hand over power to Bhutto.

The third circle was the field army and its commanders intentionally kept ill informed. The two infantry divisions in East Pakistan were short of strength particularly in armour, artillery and air cover. The total fighting strength did not exceed thirty thousand, too little to seal borders against India and also carry out genocide.

But it is a different story as far as Eastern Command is concerned. Under Lt. Gen Farman’s command, they quickly established Razakars and armed civilian organisations to fight back rebels and Bengali nationalists. This action sunk Pakistan deeper in the second wave of reactive violence. In the outnumbered field army, atrocities were forbidden and men were punished whenever they did so.

The speed of events surprised both Pakistan and India. While Pakistan rejected any notion of a political agreement, it failed to draft a viable military plan. The Indians seized the moment. The dormant Special Frontier Force (SFF), or Establishment-22 of Tibet trained by CIA were launched by RAW. Here is an eye witness account of officers who arrived at Chittagong in April 1971.

“As the ship approached Chittagong, there were bodies floating. Near the port, the bodies increased with the muddy and partially bloody water of the Brahmaputra. “The ship had to wade through a sea of bodies to enter the harbour. All the roads were littered with dead bodies of Beharis and West Pakistanis; it was impossible to remove them except by Bulldozers. In the Chittagong stadium, a mass blood collection drive was going on from captured pro Pakistanis. After the blood was drained the living corpse were dumped into the Brahmaputra, which floated them to the open sea. Near Natore was a small Bihari town called Santahar. A mass massacre was taking place. A Battalion was ordered to reach by train. The approach was difficult because of the terrible stench of putrid bodies and blood. Corps of Engineers/EME had to get civilian Bulldozers to remove bodies from the train platforms and dig mass graves where, 17,000 men women and children corpses of Biharis were buried by my Battalion alone.”

Later these graves were depicted as Bengalis massacred by Pakistan army. The government of West Pakistan failed to move public opinion on this subject. It goes to the credit of Sarmila Bose in her book ‘Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War’ that provides a peep into what happened to pro Pakistanis in East Pakistan in those fateful days of April-May 1971.  I wish Bangladesh Government has the courage to order DNA sampling of these mass graves.

Continued…..

PAKISTAN THAT WAS

BANGLADESH: THE OTHER SIDE OF STORY

PART VI

Samson Simon Sharaf

“Forty years ago in 1971, on November 14 night in Chittagong, a Pakistani sniper of the Special Service Group, felt he saw a “phantom”. The Pakistani soldier did not take any chances and opened fire. The shadowy figures melted away into the darkness. One among them was, however, dying, fatally shot. The Pakistani soldier did not know that he had just killed one of the toughest CIA-trained Tibetan guerrilla leader Dhondup Gyatotsang a brigadier of the CIA trained Tibetan Liberation Army.”

Manas Paul in his dispatch Phantom Warriors of 1971: Unsung Tibetan Guerrillas

The Journalist goes on to write it was this elite commando force called Establishment-22 that trained and blended with Mukti Bahini. This excerpt proves that the Indian involvement in East Pakistan began much before 1971. If Ashok Raina a writer on Indian intelligence is to be believed, it began much earlier around 1962-63. 1971 began with premeditated cold blooded murders, rape and tortures under the watchful eyes of RAW.

The fall of Dacca and splitting of Pakistan is conveniently forgotten by Pakistan’s establishment. The Hamood ur Rehman Commission Report ordered by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was neither released nor implemented because it could have refreshed memories. It was expedient for the power hungry corridors to continue pursuing the unethical practices and breed a culture that in the first place was the main cause of this disintegration. The biggest scare this report created was that it stood to expose the ugly role of many politicians, generals and bureaucrats. The stakes were too high for tunnel vision objectives.  Had it been released and acted upon, Pakistan would have taken a different course.

All nations have an innate conscience. This innate should never come to life. In Pakistan where politics revolves around individuals; the elites can never run the risk of awakening this conscience. Those who stand to lose most are the people who have been abandoned for over four decades. Some died before the military action, others during it and the most in the aftermath in the name of Bengali Patriotism. Many still rot in the slums of Bangladesh and Karachi. While the Bengali patriots are still celebrated and eulogised, those who ideologically supported Pakistan are still being hounded and pushed to gallows. The Bangladesh government has revised the meaning of patriotism under its latest indemnity.

But who would account for the nameless; many massacred before the military action and after the surrender till 1975?  The killing sprees and ethnic cleansing in East Pakistan and Bangladesh involved many actors. Official accounts by Bangladesh and India put all blame on Pakistan. Countries that were intrinsically involved in this debacle including USA, Soviet Union and India have cleverly camouflaged facts and use fiction, built perceptions to apportion blame on Pakistan Army. India has destroyed all records related to 1971.

Most accounts of the so called genocide are unsubstantiated. Unless DNA sampling is done, no one would know what ethnicity lies buried in mass graves. Still, propaganda against Pakistan invariably begins by quoting Anthony Mascarenhas, a West Pakistani journalist. Even his reporting cannot be substantiated as he could not be everywhere at all times. However, what researchers miss in his accounts is what he filed before the military action had begun. In a dispatch of June 1971 he wrote:-  

“First it was the massacre of the non-Bengalis in a savage outburst of Bengali hatred… On the night of March 25 the Bengali troops and paramilitary units stationed in East Pakistan mutinied and attacked non-Bengalis with atrocious savagery. Thousands of families of unfortunate Muslims, many of them refugees from Bihar who chose Pakistan at the time of the partition riots in 1947, were mercilessly wiped out. Women were raped, or had their breasts torn out with specially-fashioned knives. Children did not escape the horror; the lucky ones were killed with their parents.”

Tragically the death toll included officers and their families from West Pakistan. Most ladies and girls were raped repeatedly and killed.

Here is another eyewitness account of an officer. “As the ship approached Chittagong, there were bodies floating. Near the port, the bodies increased with the muddy and partially bloody water of the Brahmaputra. “The ship had to wade through a sea of bodies to enter the harbour. All the roads were littered with dead bodies of Beharis and West Pakistanis; it was impossible to remove them except by Bulldozers. In the Chittagong stadium, a mass blood collection drive was going on from captured pro Pakistanis. After the blood was drained the living corpse were dumped into the Brahmaputra, which floated them to the open sea. Near Natore was a small Bihari town called Santahar. A mass massacre was taking place. Out Battalion was ordered to go reach by train. The approach was difficult because of the terrible stench of putrid bodies and blood. Corps of Engineers/EME had to get civilian Bulldozers to remove bodies from the train platforms and dig mass graves where, 17,000 men women and children corpses of Biharis were buried by my Battalion alone.”

My elder brother Justin Sharaf served in East Pakistan and surrendered well after the debacle. The first question my mother asked him on repatriation was “are your hands clean”. There are many like by brother who admit that certainly, some collateral damage could have killed civilians, but there was never a meditated plan to this effect. The killing of non-Bengalis post surrender was so immense in his sector that the Indian officer who took him prisoner resigned immediately after his unit was de-inducted from Bangladesh. He said it was not possible for him to accept large scale massacres post 1971 under the eyes of Indian army.

Between January and April 1971 there was no State writ in East Pakistan. Massive massacre of non-Bengali population was committed by criminal gangs all over the country. Women were molested and raped before being killed. Bayonet strength of Pakistan Army was around 12,000 in March 1971 and swelled to 33,000 by the time surrender took place. Given that these soldiers faced multi direction threats, were dispersed in small pockets and were mostly deployed on Pakistan-India border, it is never possible for such low number of combatants to kill millions or hundreds of thousands of people and hide them in mass graves or commit large scale rapes. Even the illegitimate births recorded in Mother Theresa’s centres record more births of rapes committed after 16 December 1971.

Ashok Raina in his book, “Inside Raw: The story of India’s Secret Service” clearly refers to the Chittagong event of March 1971, “While the troops in Chittagong disembarked, RAW operatives were frantically trying to comply with the message they had received”. The message was to convince Sheikh Mujib to establish a government in exile 100 yards on the Indian side. In the same book he accepts that India pumped 2,000 Mukhti Bahini every six weeks from its training camps. Hence by July 1971, these irregulars had tied down Pakistan army along the frontiers. Eye witnesses indicate that the methods of killing were distinctively Tibetan.

Saurab Kumar in “History’s Forgotten Orphans” writes that after 16 December 1971, over 5,000 armed Awani League guerrillas dispensed mob justice killing and bayoneting pro-Pakistanis with cries of Joi Bangla. A Bengali analyst Tajammul Hussain writes that Rakhi Bahini continued to kill Pakistani federalists and non-Bengalis till 15 August 1975. He narrates one gory tale about Serajganj, a town of Pabna where many pro Pakistanis were dumped in a jail building and set on fire. He writes that such killings were a favourite sport of Mujeeb’s private armies led by Rakhi Bahini.

Sarmila Bose in her book ‘Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War’ provides a peep into what happened to pro Pakistanis in East Pakistan in those fateful days before and after 16 December 1971.  Now that she has taken the lead as also the ire of India and Bangladesh, the government of Pakistan must inquire and bring out facts about the massacre of pro-Pakistan federalists. It is only after the truth from both sides of the divides is unraveled, would the true scale of tragedy will be known.

Pakistani establishment, politicians, judiciary and bureaucracy has learnt nothing from this disaster. From the day for surrender to 51 years hence it is business as usual. Nothing has changed.

Imran Khan hounded by all other segments of state can raise awareness but cannot do it alone. His Happy Hour with Military is over. Perhaps Judiciary could emerge as a Buddy Pair. If so, it would be a miracle.

Concluded

PAKISTAN & PLIGHT OF DESI VICEROYS

1971: PART VI

Samson Simon Sharaf

After the arrest of Sheikh Mujib and Bhutto’s slogan of ‘Idhar Hum Udhar Tum’ (we here you there) the public reaction in East Pakistan was immediate and violent. The traditional revolutionary socialite spirit coalesced with the notion of Bengali Nationalism overflowing the brim. Absence of Bengali leadership (under arrest) created leaders of opportunity and anarchy. Revolts within Bengali servicemen, civil armed forces and police were contagious. Though the military action of 25 March 1971 restored some normalcy, it was not sustainable against a growing discontent.

An infantry division with no artillery and armour was airlifted from Kharian. Later another infantry division with a depleted armour regiment was airlifted from Quetta. The ORBAT indicates that these forces were for policing operations. War with India was never visualised in the battle plan. The fact these formations held on for over nine months is a tribute to field and unit commanders.

Pakistani senior officers in Eastern Command were divisive over the scale and method of military operations against civilians. They were against creating pro Pakistan armed civilian militias that further distanced the local population. Lt. General Yaqub Ali Khan, Major General Shaukat Reza and Major General Khadim Hussain Raja dissented and were removed. GOCs of the two infantry divisions that came as reinforcements had little time for preparations and were inducted immediately into operations. The Pakistani dilemma of a two front war on extra ordinarily expanded exterior lines needed political and strategic reappraisals. The high command never went to the planning and operations rooms. Stubbornly, the issue was seen as internal security and not political.

The Soviet-Indo Friendship treaty around July 1971 should have awoken the top military leadership from slumber. With Soviets coming openly in favour of India, the Pakistani strategic mind got fixed to the containment strategy against USSR expecting US-British diplomatic and low intensity military intervention as granted. An important factor in framing this perception was the vociferous presence of the left in anti-Pakistan insurgency with Indian and Soviet support, a historic predisposition of the 50s and early 60s. This wishful expectation remained an illusion. When the crunch came, the strategy of pitching Pakistan against godless communism paid no dividends. Much like 1965, when the offensive at Chamb was halted on US intervention, Pakistan’s military high command looked for orders elsewhere.

As a stop gap, it was decided to defend noodle points through shrunk interior lines pending international arbitration. As a last resort, the strategy of ‘Defence of East lies in the West’ would be implemented. As time proved, the interventions by Pakistan’s Cold War Allies never came and USSR went full throttle in supporting India with military hardware.

New Soviet induction in Indian armed forces needed time to be absorbed and Pakistan missed the window somewhere from August to October 1971. Strong dissuasive military action against India in the West could have restored the balance in Pakistan’s favour. Yes, had Pakistan declared a war on India in August-October 1971 through offensives in West Pakistan, Indian forays in East would have halted? Pakistani military planners were plagued by too many assumptions based on intangibles and less Realpolitik. Time and tide do not wait for the timid. In strategy, time is of essence and strengthened India manifold.

The offence in the West was notional. The strike formations were never moved into battle. Spatial gains if any were ceded to lack of decision making in the timeframe that India was imbalanced. One corps commander timidly conceded over 500 villages to Indian forces with the comment that he had a carte blanche to cede territory right up to Marala Link Canal.

Indian strategic planners also had dilemmas. They feared a possible three front war with the Indian Army divided between West and East Pakistan, and the Indo Chinese border. Two Pakistani armoured divisions in West Pakistan posed a serious threat to India. Politically, they also feared the rise of Bengali Nationalism that could, as in the past, lead to a greater Bengali Movement.

As a counter move, India accelerated its diplomatic offensive resulting in Pakistan’s isolation. In the interim, while Indian army reorganised, it inducted Tibetan Liberation Army in guise of Mukti Bahini. This had immediate effects as loyalties of Bengalis in the short term fell with India thereby outmanoeuvring the notion of a greater Bengal. Meanwhile India reorganised with new Soviet equipment to wait for winters when a Sino-Indian war would be prohibitive in the snow clad sub-zero terrain. This gamble released mountain divisions for both western and eastern fronts.

The Indian diplomatic and strategic manoeuvres were far superior. By reaching into the very womb, India won the war in the minds rather than on the battlefield. The C in C Indian Western Command General Kunhiraman Palat Candeth admitted in his book The Western Front: The indo-Pakistan War, 1971 that “the most critical period was between 8 and 26 October when 1 Corps and 1 Armoured Division were still outside Western Command. Had Pakistan put in a pre-emptive attack during that period, the consequences would have been too dreadful to contemplate and all our efforts would have been trying to correct the adverse situation forced on us”.

Pakistan unfortunately never saw the window. The infertile minds of the ruling coterie banked too heavily on non-existent support from its allies. Perhaps the most defining moment was the appearance of a nuclear powered Soviet submarine in Bay of Bengal that sent jitters through NATO and USA. It was thereon a military impossibility for about 33,000 riflemen with outdated and Beyond Local Repair tanks, depleted field artillery and a lone squadron of Pakistan Air Force to hold on for long 2000 Kms long front.

At places the force ratio was 1:50. The defensive battle was complicated by the nature of riverine terrain, wide gaps, hostile local population, vulnerable lines of communications. Infiltration by Indian forces and Mukti Bahini through wide gaps was easy. Yet, these contingents of under strength and often isolated units fought valiantly ceding no major success to India on the International border till the day the war was called off. This was the caption of an Indian newspaper on that fateful day of surrender, “For these men, the war ended early. They fought hard but the tide of Indian advance was irresistible. Now they bask in the sun having obeyed the final dreaded order of their commander, Lay down your arms”.

There was no exit plan and the only that existed depended on bonhomie of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Disgruntled with his new made Soviet friends he went into a strategic paralysis.

1971 was a disaster in which heads never rolled. Perhaps the biggest lessons of 1971 were empowerment of people, and futility of state franchised armed militias.

Pakistan’s establishment has conveniently ignored both and the forgotten history stares and jeers at us for our created follies.  

Within two years, Pakistan amongst the fasted growing economies of the world was decimated.

To be continued…..

PAKISTAN THAT WAS & IS

INFIGHTING WITHOUT RESPITE

PART III

Samson Simon Sharaf

It was 3^rd December 2016. This day 51 years ago, India openly launched aggression against East Pakistan to finally cut Pakistan to size. This foray in 2022 had a fresh start within a jigsaw of individual desires and international intrigues that prevail even today.

Five decades hence, the only differences are that Pakistan is contiguous, has a stronger and battle-hardened Army, a nuclear capability and a corrupt self-serving democracy. The semblances are that the judicial system remains benign, the politicians remain self-serving and a segment of media like Morning News of 1971 is vitriolic against the hard realities. In 1971 a Pakistani journalist misreported massacre of Biharis at Santahar, Natore as Bengalis killed by Pakistan Army, setting in motion a perception that caused Pakistan’s isolation.

Most mass graves of atrocities blamed on Pakistan Army belong to Pro Pakistan Bengalis and Biharis. If and when DNA sampling is done, the truth will speak loud and clear and Sarmila Bose’s book ‘Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War’ will be vindicated and Mascarenhas of Morning News titled a traitor.

Today there is pain and furor over the murder of investigative reporter Arshad Sharif in Kenya. Dynamics are similar and eerie. Imran Khan who leads the single largest federal political party has been edged out as the Prime Minster through electoral management.

Though Indian military forays into Pakistan had begun by 22 November 1971, 3 December was a declared act of war. Pakistan’s fighting force barely amounting to 30,000 combatants was littered all along the border. It had insignificant air and armour support. The local population reinforced by Tibetan Liberation Army in guise of Mukti Bahini was hostile.

In 1971, Pakistan’s internal environment international dynamics had been shaped for the division. Rather than open up political options for negotiations and settlements of Sheikh Mujib’s Six Points, a military establishment under pressure from Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto launched an ill-advised operation in March 1971; a flashpoint that conflagrated the situation beyond redemption.

The most effective concentric circle that advised and pressurized decisions was led by Yaya’s Martial Law advisors and civil opportunist. With the liaison of Lt General Rahim and Major General Ghulam Umar, Bhutto became an integral part of this group advocating a bulwark approach. No wonder then, after landing in West Pakistan, Bhutto said, “Pakistan is saved”. It meant, ‘West Pakistan is rid of East Pakistan.’ Military pushed itself into a political turmoil for which it had no solution.

Theories that East Pakistan was a drain on the resources of the West have all proven wrong. In these intervening years, Bangladesh has fared far better in economic indices. The momentum of the economic juggernaut put together during Ayub Khans regime has come to a halt. Tangibly, Pakistan has no substantial progress to show after 1969. Pakistan of today bears many semblances to Pakistan of those shameful days of 1971.

No one in West Pakistan believed that Bengalis were more politically aware with a history. The stigma of being less patriotic hit Bengali leaders the hardest. In 1969, the anti Ayub riots in East and West Pakistan had divergent logics. East was looking for autonomy as proposed by Suhrawardy in 1958, while Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto used the Tashkent Card to agitate against his godfather. He used a leftist ideology he had ironically helped suppressed in the 50s.

Political economy and feudalism were the main contention. East and West polarized around two new leaders; Sheikh Mujeeb ur Rehman of Awami League and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan People’s Party. These divergent movements led to different pathways not in control of leaders who formed them. Mujeeb got Soviet and Indian support while Bhutto was let down by the Soviets who had betrothed him at Tashkent.

Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto had lost the confidence of Ayub Khan during those days at Tashkent. There are suggestions by historians that Pakistan’s delegation in Tashkent had multiple centers that isolated Ayub Khan. There was visible warmth between Soviet Foreign Minister Kosygin and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. This warmth was manifested in 1969 when Bhutto launched his own left leaning political party. This was in sharp contrast to the Bhutto of 50s and 60s, who as a feudal politician had played his role in curbing the liberal left on the beck and call of Iskander Mirza and Ayub Khan.

In 1969, Pakistan stood isolated from USA. Russia used this time to build its relationships with India that included the pact that reorganised Indian armed forces in 1970-71. Bhutto’s inflexibility with Sheikh Mujib in 1970 was a disaster. By December 1971, events went beyond what the ambitious Bhutto had perceived. The appearance of Soviet nuclear submarines in the Bay of Bengal shied away the Americans 7^th Fleet.

Bhutto felt betrayed.

By 1973 he began edging out leftists and shifting gears towards an Islamic Block and capitalism. His self-serving politics from 1965 to 1971 had a very damaging effect on the federation. Post 1971, he reversed Pakistan’s economic development which till today is beyond redemption.

Five decades hence, the story is similar. The lull in terrorism has more to do with geographical gains than winning the hearts and minds. As corruption charges about the ruling Sharif and Zardari families increase, the inevitable conclusion is that both have exploited the state to make fortunes.

Interventionists both at home and abroad are likely to exploit the situation. Plans are again afoot to create turmoil from Karachi to Quetta; the corridor that controls all approaches to Gwadar. Not only the far and few Baloch separatist but also sub nationalist parties like MQM (London) and PKMAP are on board with PMLQ and PPPP.

In view of the resistance in IHK, India has vociferously let known its intentions on Balochistan and all sub nationalist movements in Pakistan. Along with Afghanistan, it also exercises control over dissident militant factions. Given the prevailing policies, resurgence of terrorism from simmer to full blown is a matter of time.

Like March to November 1971 the battle for hearts and minds in FATA and Balochistan has yet to begin. There are no plans to resuscitate Pakistan’s economic potential. Due to a recent geostrategic shift, CPEC is stalled. Regime Change Operation has done the inevitable in which the aspirations of the people are trampled. If the establishment and mainstream media is to be believed, Imran Khan who has repeatedly demonstrated he commands Pakistan’s majority is the worst that ever happened to Pakistan. The assassination attempt on him is depicted a drama by the government.

Much like East Pakistan of 1971, the state and nation are at conflict within.

Like 1971, while the state faced challenges, PMLN and PPPP are following a dubious agenda after regime change. The state can rot and stink so long ar as they achieve their collective objectives. They are cheered on by their minion parties in this dirty game of strange bedfellows.

As in 1971, Pakistan’s political stability and democracy are headed into unknown. The nation and state are fragmented. What stands between nothingness and national revival is Imran Khan censored on mainstream media whose conscience died long ago.

Is the Titanic is headed towards a disaster?

Only two men stand to avert the disaster: Imran Khan and the new COAS General Asim Munir.

Dynamics of challenges to both are different if seen from their individual perspectives.

The right choice lies with aspirations of people of Pakistan who back Imran Khan.

THE PAKISTAN THAT WAS

REVISTING 1906-1971

REVISTING PART II

Samson Simon Sharaf

As West Pakistan nears the end of its 51^th year of separation from the East, suffice to comment that lessons if any were ignored by the elastic conscience and political opportunism of leaders. The people absolved themselves by viewing it a fait accompli by unrepresentative ruling elites. Losing more than half the population never result in introspection. In military terms there was no debriefing and therefore lessons not learnt are being repeated.

One conclusion that was ignored and continued to be ignored is that East Pakistan viewed the unity through a socio-economic paradigm while the West continued to enforce a West Centric Security paradigm. On deeper analysis this divergence began in 1906.

Despite this political culture and insensitivity, what remains of Pakistan holds together due to geographical contiguity that did not exist in case of East Pakistan. Pakistan’s corrupt political and socio-economic systems continue to overrule the aspirations of the people unlike their kin in East. They hold majority either too lethargic or disconnected from nationhood to exercise the power of ballot. The realization and national urge for a closure and way forward thereof is missing. The style of politics adopted by politicians of the West has worsened by time. The fact that Pakistan has survived owes much to its small cadre of hardy people, geopolitics and performance of armed forces against terrorism and separatism.  

Here is the debate.

If from 1906 till 1947, the East and West were part of the same struggle in which the East provided the platform, intellectual inputs and direction. The question remains, why they parted ways after the battle was won?

In West Pakistan, this question became a taboo for far too long, while the separatist (if we call Awami Leaguers so) in Bangladesh that comprised only 24% of the electorate chose a violent route. For West, the question that this tragedy set aside the idea of a United Pakistan rots in the trash of Inventive History.

As the sole self-proclaimed custodians of ‘Ideology of Pakistan’ created by a dictator, West Pakistanis cannot eclipse historical facts. After the partition of Bengal and Muslim Majority self-rule, the idea of separation came predominantly from the Muslims of East Bengal. Muhammadan Education Conference of the Aligarh modernity school changed to All India Muslim League at Dacca in 1906. The first convener was Nawab Sir Khawaja Salimullah of Dacca who mentored two stalwarts, A. K. Fazlul Haq who wrote the first Creed of the League and Choudhury Khaliquzzaman.

The thesis of separation mostly advocated by Bengali leaders with the obvious experience of history was ignored till Allama Iqbal as President of Punjab Muslim League reflected the concept in his famous Allahabad address. Though he met the Bengali leaders many times, his address referred only to India’s North West Muslim provinces and ignored East Bengal. The reason was that the League was seeking autonomy within the Indian Union. The Punjabi/UP leaders resigned Bengali leaders to fight their own struggle.

Pakistan’s inventive history credits Allama Iqbal more than the founders of this idea is an historical distortion. These frustrations are reflected in the many twists and turns Bengali leaders they took thereafter, and recorded in many dissenting notes and speeches of A. K. Fazlul Haq, the Sher-e-Bangla.

Knowing that North West comprised NWFP and Punjab was dominated by Unionists and Congress sympathizers (Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan), Bengalis continued to provide the missing impetus for a Muslim Identity. At that point of time, Old Balochistan and the State of Khairpur in Sindh were out of contention. Punjab centrism with a shadow of the UP lobby caused irreparable damage to the Federation of Pakistan; yet these are the unfortunate lines on which the West Pakistani narrative was built and continues to be supported by the establishment.

A. K. Fazlul Haq, the Chief Minister of Bengal and Choudhury Khaliquzzaman with reluctant support from Sikandar Hayat Khan of Punjab (a Unionist whose buck stopped short of separation) managed to push through the Lahore Resolution on 24 March 1940. The final interpretation of the Resolution was left to a committee that ignored the question of States within a Union. Obviously, it was to keep Sikandar quiet. After the impromptu Cabinet Mission Plan that Congress rejected, the League pushed for a single Pakistan with two wings.

This partition of India was pursued in haste to the chagrin of Bengali leaders, leaving many questions of autonomy under federalism unaddressed. The result was that within the first few years of independence, intransience on part of the West accounted for wiping away support of the League in East Pakistan. As early as 1954, the East was vying for greater autonomy within the Federation. Once the 1956 constitution ignored the questions of Federation, the separatist movement was a question of time.

By August 1947, rifts between leaders of East Bengal and those from UP and Punjab widened. There was serious dissent in East Pakistan over adoption of Urdu as the national language, Objective Resolution and non-federal constitution of 1956. Bengali leaders were particularly sensitive about relegation of religious minorities that comprised more than 15% population of East Pakistan. These were mostly Dalit who under the leadership of Jogendra Nath Mandal (Pakistan’s first law minister) had thrown their lot with Pakistan.

Though after partition, Muslim League managed to form the first government; by 1954 it was edged to insignificance in East by United Front, Communist Party and the Awami League. The United Front ruled the province till imposition of Martial Law in 1958.

Because leaders in West Pakistan looked at Hindus within the construct of India, Bengali leaders and prime ministers were viewed with suspicion. Due to this divergent stance East Pakistani leaders were perceived less patriotic. The conspiracy theory of the West that Hindu presence diluted the Ideology of Pakistan in the East was accepted without logic and reason. It also downgraded the famous speech of Qaid e Azam Muhaammad Ali Jinnah on 11 August 1947 on political inclusivism.

While these fissures widened and League’s support in East Pakistan waned, the Governor-General of Pakistan dismissed A. K. Fazlul Haq from public office on charges of inciting secession. Later, Field Marshal Ayub Khan banned him from politics. Ever since, this suppression of the East and the progressive left has marred genuine political reforms in Pakistan.

While the West dominated the events after 1947, there was no effort or narrative to counter the political humiliation and alienation caused to leaders of the East. It was only a matter of time that the inevitable happened.

Free and fair elections under a military dictator in 1970 exposed the hidden cracks. No single party emerged as a symbol of Federation. Awami League (a breakaway faction of Muslim League) in the East led by Shiekh Mujeeb ur Rehman and Pakistan People’s Party led by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in the West emerged as two irreconcilable belligerents. Imprisoned Sheikh Mujeeb ur Rehman was flexible and insisted autonomy but not division. Bhutto’s politics were exclusive and inflexible.

Exploiting the ignorance on part of the military regime and lack of communications amongst Pakistani politicians, Russia and India inserted their narratives and force structure into the void. Armed forces fell into the trap and became the fall guy.

Continued……….

THE PAKISTAN THAT WAS

THE GREAT BETRAYAL: 1947-71

PART I

تیری یاد آ گئی، غم خوشی میں ڈھل گئے
اک چراغ کیا جلا، سو چراغ جل گئے
راہگزر میں پیار کی، تم تھے میرے ہمسفر
تم تو ہو گئے جدا اور بھٹک رہے ہیں ہم

Film. Chand Aur Chandni from East Pakistan

Samson Simon Sharaf

“Pakistan’s constitutional history is a story of repeated betrayals and surgical procedures by butchers. Bureaucratic intrigues, repeated military interventions and exclusion of popular sentiments that have fortified the role of elites. They have directly and indirectly toppled governments to ensure that Pakistan’s political clock clocks what they want. These elites have exploited the many gaps in political structure of Pakistan for entrenchment, wherein even apparently popular governments once in opposition adopted a similar approach.”

 (Pakistan’s Achilles Heels: Nation. January 10 2010.)

I call it the Achilles Heels because the quest of unbridled powers beyond the Viceroy System of 1935 far outweighed the fervor to consolidate Pakistan’s founding paradigm. The interim constitution was violated with abandon by a group of few. Inherently, West Pakistan with a better infrastructure, investors, bankers, exclusivity in defence was more powerful to exercise the whip.

Rafay Alam summed it up by writing that, “there has been no revolutionary exertion of rights in this part of the world; it is not difficult to conclude that the Pakistani state did not acquire a fresh personality at its birth and that instead, it inherited the worst possible mindset for running a country.”

But there were repeated revolutionary exertion of rights from 1906 to 1940 and many times later till 1971 from East Pakistan that were denied in name of an invented nationalism by elites of West Pakistan till disintegration of the country in 1971. Neither lessons from history of defeat are learnt nor a correction course to Pakistan’s politics applied. Ignoring aspirations of the people in past cost the majority of population. The present is no exception.

In retrospect, the events from 1949 to the Martial Law of 1958 imposed by Iskandar Mirza, a bureaucrat/politician in a soldier’s garb reflected political jingoism and not nation building. Within the musical chair of prime ministers, the idea of reinforcing constitutionalism was eclipsed by expediency. Prime ministers were treated as pawns. In 1951, Prime Minister Liaqat Ali Khan was murdered in a mysterious manner. Khawaja Nazimuddin an East Pakistani succeeded him till he was arbitrarily shown the door by Governor General Ghulam Muhammad (another bureaucrat) in 1953. Martial Law was imposed in Punjab and the provincial government in East Pakistan replaced by direct central rule. He was replaced by another East Pakistani Muhammad Ali Bogra. When Bogra tried to democratically assert his powers through amendments in the 1935 Act, Ghulam Muhammad with support of the army dissolved Pakistan’s first constituent assembly.

The second constituent assembly was explosive and irreconcilable to Ghulam Muhammad who was backed by a General Ayub Khan. Muslim League was wiped from East Pakistan and replaced  by A. K. Fazlul Huq’s Krishak Sramik Samajbadi Dal and the Awami League led by Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy. It was a fight to sudden death between A. K. Fazul Haq and Suhrawardy setting pyrrhic trends. In West Pakistan, Muslim League melted and overnight Republican Party emerged. Due to this hotchpotch of old leaguers, unionists and feudal elites, the culture of Lotaism began.

After the promulgation of the 1956 Constitution, Suhrawardy emerged as the consensus prime minister. Suffice to say that 1956 constitution was an affront to federalism in a country whose two halves were separated by 1,000 miles. He lasted merely thirteen months. His fault; advocating a federal system seen as separatism, that was later adopted in 1973 and devolved through 18^th amendment.

With agitational politics spurred by a considerably strong left in East Pakistan, threats of secession by Khan of Kalat and intriguing by West Pakistani politicians, Iskandar Mirza declared martial law in 1958. He was later ousted by General Ayub Khan. The army that had worked behind the scenes with West Pakistani politicians was now in the driving seat.

Over the years, the army had been co-opted into the political system by weak civilian bureaucrats turned politicians. At the same time, it exploited the Cold War tensions to secure military hardware from USA. Pakistan joined the CENTO and SEATO containment alliances to shore its defences against India. This newly acquired warmth with USA was used to over awe politicians already weakened by intrigues, infighting and disunity. Thus began the era of basic democracies and a presidential system meant to safeguard western interests against communism.

Reactions in East and West were different.

The East viewed a West Pakistan centric policy as a bias. To them the issues of Chittagong Hill Tracts, water appropriation, nuisance value of Calcutta Market and empowerment of people was far more urgent. Though the army made a good contribution by sealing eastern borders with India and building Chittagong as the first major port, it was not enough to address the seeds of discord sowed by the first thirteen years of intrigues. Vertical pockets of development in East Pakistan were controlled by the West. Bengalis desired socio-economic empowerment of people a concept alien to Pakistan even in 2022.

West Pakistani ruling elite’s apprehensions about the new Bengali leadership was reinforced by international politics and Pakistan’s warmth with USA. In February 1954, there was a protest in Dacca over Pakistan’s alignment in Cold War. The scuffling with police outside the provincial assembly was its death knell. The ruling group in Karachi (Governor General Ghulam Muhammad, C-in-C General Ayub Khan and Defence Secretary Sikander Mirza) saw this situation as a grave threat to the new policy of containment. After signing the mutual US-Pakistan defense agreement in May 1954, the Governor General dismissed East Pakistan Provincial Assembly on the flimsy charge that Fazlul Haq had uttered separatist words to Indian media. Yes the same Fazal e Haq who wrote the Creed of All India Muslim League in 1906 and drafted the 1940 Lahore Resolution. A day earlier, Pakistani Prime Minister told the US Charge de Affairs that Governor rule was planned for East Pakistan to rout communists. Declassified memos indicate that as far back as 1954, General Ayub Khan confided with US ambassador that, ‘it would be necessary to keep military rule in effect in East Pakistan for a considerable length of time.’

In East Pakistan, Pakistan stationed only two infantry battalions in 1948. In 1950 the strength was raised to two infantry brigades. Deployments of an air squadron took place in 1962. The military axiom that defence of the East lies in the West, made East Pakistanis feel vulnerable. The deployment of less than an infantry division in 1965 Kashmir War convinced East Pakistani Intellectuals that they were being left vulnerable due to a Punjab centric defence and foreign policy. Excluded from the main decision making mechanism, they were the Orwellian Sheep feeling helpless outside the glass house. To make matters worse, popular East Pakistani representatives were replaced by military friendly elites who had no roots in the masses.

No one in West Pakistan paused to think that Bengalis were a politically awakened class with a history. In 1969, the anti Ayub riots in East and West Pakistan had divergent logics. East was looking for autonomy as proposed by Suhrawardy in 1958, while Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto used the Tashkent Card to agitate against his godfather with a leftist ideology he ironically had helped suppress in the 50s.

These divergent movements led to different pathways whose origin lies in 1906.

To be Continued……

IMPORTED OBJECTIVES AND CRISES

Samson Simon Sharaf

The more you try to change, more it remains the same. In search of trees, we lose sight of the forest.

Like most Pakistanis, I am also a dreamer. In the backdrop of family tradition, these dreams started early. Choosing soldiering in 1972 was a stepping stone.

It is 17 Years since I retired. My students and cadets served as three stars and retired. Some are still around in highest positions. Despite despair, hope is not forlorn. Like most, I have not counted trees. I wish Pakistan to rise beyond horizons.

Despite majority we are a drop in the ocean because the elites that control Pakistan leave no space for common aspirations. They by definitions look beyond horizons only for their interests. They are happy counting trees as long as they perpetuate. Someday, this cycle will break. There will be a Bastille and a Revolution. It could be in my twilight years or later. Happen it must and happen it will!

I served with three Army Chiefs. With appointment of each, I saw hope only to fade with time.

General Jehangir Karamat who oversaw Pakistan’s nuclearization was equally insistent on Fast Track National Development.  I remember the day he left office never to return. My dreams took a knock.

General Pervez Musharraf was more vigorous. After the coup he started with an early flourish. Economy and development were on wheels. By 2004 he was surrounded by courtiers. He lost track and fizzled out.

General Ashfaq Kayani was more laid back and thought deeply. Most, he remained busy in sustaining two governments that were product of National Reconciliation. There was nothing spectacular. His extension caused attrition and gaps to chain of command already damaged by General Musharraf’s long tenure. The fruits of economic revival during General Musharraf’s tenure were capitulated and fate of Pakistan put in the hands of thugs.

After a brief tenure of Imran Khan with GDP averaging 6 from 2020-22, he was removed and stripped through a regime change operation. The thugs are back and hence the continuity from 2007 to present.

The manner with which these carpetbaggers have been managed indicates a rough going for Imran Khan already recovering from three multiple gun wounds. The system is loaded against him inasmuch as aspirations of the people of Pakistan are with him. A change, here or there would make no difference.

The actors of NRO since 2007 are International and National.

The international actors relentlessly pursue a global dominance agenda for a weak, pliant, discredited and non-nuclear Pakistan. The internal are miserly pawns dancing to the bigger orchestra. 2007 till today they have danced to the same chords.

On the geostrategic template, Imran Khan is a small dot, who dared and challenged the dominating equilibrium led by USA. He was a free-thinking voice of reason and self-esteem. His comments on peripheral wars were not taken well. He seemed too independent in contrast to pliable regimes that ruled and served masters for the past decades. Therefore, he had to go.

Objectives of local apologists are not clear.

If the objective was to get a pliant leadership into power, the objective is met only halfway because bending Pakistan backwards is also back breaking? In eight months more than three decades are lost.

If the objective was to get a credible leadership into power, 60% of the lot is involved in massive corruption and facing charges, arraignments and accountability in courts? To save and survive them, accountability laws have been changed.

If the objective was to put Pakistan on a nose-diving trajectory leading to bad governance, unrest, adverse public reaction and destabilisation, then it is certainly achieved. This is an imported objective and hence imported crises.

It is true and factual. The night is long, dark and tempest ridden. There will be a tomorrow!