Jump to content

1971 war crimes: In Kolkata, Islamists rally for genocide

seedhi

By seedhi
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

seedhi Newbie

seedhi

Posted
Posted
1971 war crimes: In Kolkata, Islamists rally for genocide by Praveen Swami Mar 30, 2013 Noorul Islam’s home was the first to burn, torched by the soldiers who had arrived at the hamlets on the eastern side of Parerhat Bandar, searching for pro-independence activists and guerrillas. The Pakistani soldiers didn’t find what they were looking for, though. Manik Posari and his servant Ibrahim Sheikh were led away, and tortured. Later, Sheikh was shot dead at point-blank range, and his body thrown into the river. Posari, who escaped the Pakistan army camp that night, knew the man who picked him out as pro-independence activist: he was the local grocer. For forty years after 8 May, 1971, Posari watched Delawar Hossain Sayeedi grow—grow from an impoverished seller of oil and spices in the Parerhat bazaar, to the multi-millionaire head of the Jama’at-e-Islami party in Bangladesh—a journey helped by the gold he looted from the Parerhat’s citizens. Posari might yet live to watch his torturer receive punishment—but not if a coalition of Islamic organisations in Kolkata has its way. Today, its members gathered at the Shaheed Minar to protest against the death sentence handed down to Sayeedi by the war crimes tribunal. The All-Bengal Muslim Youth Federation, the Sunnat-ul-Jama’at, the Madrasa Student Union and the Welfare Party of India, among others, say Sayeedi is being persecuted for his political beliefs. The movement against Sayeedi’s conviction also has the backing of the Indian wing of the Jama’at-e-Islami. Syed Jalaluddin Umari, the head of the Jama’at-e-Islami Hind has called his Bangladeshi sister-party, “the nation’s most caring and concernedâ€. He recently even denied any war crimes had taken place—a breath-taking lie. Sayeedi’s Razakar militia, witnesses told Bangladesh’s ongoing 1971 war-crimes tribunal, kidnapped Gourango Saha’s sisters, Mohomaya, Anno and Komol, and handed them over to Pakistan army troops who raped them over three days. They burned down the Hindu-owned homes in the village of Umedpur, looting homes—and shooting dead at least one local resident, Bisabali, after torturing him. They carried out the large-scale ethnic cleansing of Hindus from areas along the India-Bangladesh border. From the brilliant critique of 1971 denialism by the scholar Naeem Mohaiemen, among others, we know such savagery was routine in 1971. Let us be clear: Umari and his allies have every right to stage peaceful protests in support of the perpetrators of these obscenities—in a robust democracy, this is exactly as it should be. The depressing fact, however, is that not one of the major political parties in West Bengal have seen fit to stage counter-protests against the reactionaries defending the Jama’at. This is, not surprisingly, about politics. Muslim reactionaries, along with pro-Maoist forces, played an important role in mobilising support for the Singur agitation which brought chief minister Mamata Banerjee to power. Left parties want their Muslim support back—hence their collective silence on the streets of Kolkata. Fine—but let’s have the truth. For one, the men the Kolkata protestors are defending fought and killed Indian soldiers. The official military history of the Bangladesh war of 1971—regrettably unpublished, though available online—states that the organisation was raised from Jama’at cadre to “support the West Pakistani troopsâ€. Fifty thousand personnel, mainly from the Islami Chhatra Shibir, the Jama’at’s youth wing, joined the Razakars, as well as sister-organisations like al-Badr and al-Shams. The groups were trained and armed by the Pakistan army, at centres at in Dhaka and Khulna. Newspaper reports from the time record Sayeedi as being among them. The Razakars faced Indian troops in battle throughout the war of 1971. The 13 Rajputana Rifles, the war history records, suffered casualties in a 13 December, 1971, operation to capture a ration dump at Dayalpur, killing 13 Razakars and eight soldiers in retaliation. It also faced fighting with the Razakars at Jagannathpur Ghat the next day. Mahadeo Curao, a soldier with the 2 Paracommando regiment, snared in the tail of a C-119—and ended hanging on it for 20 minutes. He eventually managed to drop using a safety parachute, evaded fire from Pakistani soldiers on his way down, and walked 10 miles with his 2-inch mortar and sten-gun before he could make contact with the Mukti Bahini. He then participated, the war history says, “in three raids against the Razakarsâ€. Secondly, the Kolkata protestors are defending some of the most savage mass-murderers in recent history. “The members of al-Badr and al-Shams, themselves being Bengalis, could easily mix with the locals without arousing suspicionsâ€, the Indian war history states states. “Then, the Pakistan troops would encircle certain areas and kill all those on the hit list. Sometimes, they would arrest suspected persons and bring them to torture chambers in the cantonments for extracting information from them. After torturing some of them to death, they would then throw their dead bodies into mass graves. Hundreds of doctors, engineers, educationists, thinkers and highly-skilled professionals were killedâ€. In a 21 March, 1971 cable, the United States’ consul in Dhaka, Archer Blood, recorded his “mute and horrified witnesses to a reign of terror by the Pakistani Militaryâ€. He wrote how “with the support of the Pakistani Military, non-Bengali Muslims are systematically attacking poor people’s quarters and murdering Bengalis and Hindusâ€. “Among those marked for extinction in addition to the Awami League hierarchyâ€, he wrote, “are student leaders and university facultyâ€. Later, in what has become one of the most famous telegrams of diplomatic history, Blood denounced his own government: “Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities. Our government has evidenced what many will consider moral bankruptcyâ€. West Bengal’s politicians have failed to show a tenth of the courage Blood did in 1971. Their silence in the face of today’s demonstration is pure undiluted moral bankruptcy. It is true there has been criticism of the Bangladesh war crimes trials’ fairness—though it should also be noted the tribunal has defended itself credibly. It is true, as commentators like Mohaiemen have noted, that the crimes weren’t all on one side. In no war in human history has one side been blameless. But only someone with a non-functional moral compass would argue the fact that the United Kingdom and Soviet Union killed German civilians in World War II made them equivalent to the Nazi regime. The truth about Bangladesh is simple: one side engaged in genocide; the other resisted it. There is no moral middle ground. Islamist protesters in Kolkata know which side they’re on. Though the Indian Jama’at-e-Islami ostensibly has no links with the Bangladesh Jama’at-e-Islami, both owe allegiance to Abul Ala Maududi—the Hyderabad-born founding patriarch of modern political Islam. Islam, Maududi argued, wasn’t a “hotchpotch of ritualsâ€. Instead, it was a “revolutionary ideology which seeks to alter the social order of the entire world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and idealsâ€. He promised that “if the Muslim Party commands enough resources, it will eliminate un-Islamic governments and establish the power of Islamic government in their place.†These were the words. 1971 was the practice. The Pakistan army and the Razakars were its tools. “I remained in the [insane asylum] for six months in 1973â€, wrote the Pakistani dissident soldier Nadir Ali, in his famous memoirs. “What drove me mad? Well, I felt the collective guilt of the Army actionâ€. This basic human decency is something no-one in Kolkata seems to feel—not the Islamists and not those we’ve elected to represent us. http://www.firstpost.com/india/679670-679670.html
Jai Indian "secularism".
King Khan Newbie

King Khan

Posted
Posted

Although India officially supported this trial but Muslim votebank is the main reason none in West Bengal stand against Umari and his allies . Besides historically India in fact did help these Sayeedis escape from trial & shelter inside while signing that controversial war treaty for the interest of surrender of 90k Pakistani soulders back then, leaving war criminal issue in hand of Pakistan which was very much known that Pakistan wont ever hang her own soulders, al-badr al-shams and collaborators aka Razakars. I guess smart ars West Bengal’s politicians are waiting for Bangladesh govt to ban this fundamentalist radicalists grouping first, then a pro/anti stance can favor them partial vote. They simply dont care about natonal interest or the virtue of war blood justice.

Texy Veteran

Texy

Posted
Posted

What are these feckers doing in my beautiful city :mad: I don't understand, if they hate India, Indians, no respect for martyred Indian soldiers, sole loyalty lies with anything related to their religion only then why not move to Afghanistan, Pakistan or some other dump? What are they still doing here?

someone Rising Star

someone

Posted
Posted

An Islamic rally for war criminals in Kolkata - why are TMC and Left silent?

A belligerent rally in Kolkata by 16 Islamic organisations in support of Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, one of the prime accused in the 1971 genocide in Bangladesh, is indicative of West Bengal’s liberal space shrinking, says Dr Anirban Ganguly. Something unprecedented happened on March 30 in Kolkata. Sixteen Islamic organisations came together at the Maidan, the second largest public ground in the city, in protest against the ongoing war crimes trial in Bangladesh, against the Shahbag sit-in and in support of the vice-president of the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, one of the prime accused in the 1971 genocide in Bangladesh. It was astounding to see a huge and belligerent crowd gather from all over the state to support one of the best known razakars and collaborators with the Pakistan Army in its genocide against Muslims and Hindus in East Pakistan. Speakers addressing the gathering attempted to whip up hysterical support for the Jamaat and its leaders and pledged that just as West Bengal’s Muslims prevented Salman Rushdie from the entering the state and hounded out Taslima Nasreen. In 2007 they would generate a movement against the pro-war crime trial bloggers in Bangladesh and would take on their supporters with the same zeal. They even threatened to block any future visit of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India. But most shocking was their brazen support for Sayeedi, a known vocal anti-India preacher, a rabid anti-Hindu who has been active in organising pogroms against minorities in Bangladesh over the years and one of the most avid collaborators in Pakistan’s genocide against fellow Muslims. They openly declared their support for Sayeedi saying that a death sentence for Sayeedi in effect meant a death sentence for the Koran and Islam. These speakers chose to ignore the fact that Sayeedi was being tried for killing in cold blood their fellow religionists. It was for the first time that such a mobilisation took place in Kolkata and it simply reinforced an emerging mindset which has begun trying to consolidate a pan-Bengal Islamic identity. Incidentally, it was from the Maidan in August 1946 that the call for ‘direct action’ was given by the Muslim League. The result of that call on the history of both parts of Bengal is too well known to even require a passing reiteration. But our politicians have deliberately chosen to ignore that past. Not a single political party, and in them especially those who at the first opportunity, jump to dissect delusional dimensions of Hindu fascism and habitually get into describing various conjured Hindutva theatres of genocidal experiments or pontificate on the need to maintain the secular and syncretic texture of our nationhood, came forward to condemn the positions taken in the meeting. Not one political party even recalled that Sayeedi and his ilk were part of those criminal groups which selectively hunted out and massacred Hindus, fellow Bengali Muslims and helped to sustain Pakistani resistance to Indian soldiers. The Shahbag protesters have been calling for the establishment of a truly secular and constitutional Bangladesh where religious bigots would be reined in and their anti-national tendencies curbed and yet they find no support from our political secularists. Both the Left Front and the Trinamool Congress have maintained a studied silence having mortgaged over the years their politics to Islamic fundamentalist elements in the state. Comrades who jump at every opportunity to display their secular credentials in order to keep communal forces at bay through organising rallies, sit-ins, and seminars have not issued even as much as a statement. In fact Sayeedi himself had a very clear benchmark for Communists, “Leftists are not Muslims. They don’t believe in prayers,†he had declared. It has always been an axiomatic truth for him that no non-Muslim could be allowed to live in Bangladesh. He assiduously worked for it ever since the War of Liberation in 1971. No wonder comrades in Bangladesh find it difficult to survive on their own and have prudently sided with Sheikh Hasina. The Congress believing that it shall gain space with the electorates’ gradual disillusionment with the TMC has obviously kept quiet. Its studied silence is part of its larger grand design of mobilising country wide minority support. Nor has the Indian media come forward to debate the phenomenon; it is still incapable of visualizing its status once congregations such as these begin spawning Sayeedi clones all over India. For the media and journalists Sayeedi had a simple equation, “Journalists write lies. They are the enemies of Islamâ€. It is well documented as to what Sayeedi did to those whom he considered as enemies of Islam. It is this stoic silence in face of a rising vocal Islamic fundamentalism which is worrisome and condemnable. The liberal space in Bengal is fast shrinking and we have paid a heavy price for such a constriction in the past. Those in whose support the Maidan congregation was organised were at their vicious best when it came to treating minorities in their own country. Sayeedi himself, as head of the local Al Badr and Al Shams, has been convicted of killing Hindus, burning their homes and businesses and of forceful conversion. He assisted the Pakistan army in its operation of decimating Hindus. Sydney Schanberg, then correspondent of the New York Times, noted this selective approach, ‘the [Pakistani] army is now concentrating on Hindus, the killing is more selective, [and] has not stopped.’ Schanberg further recorded how the Pakistan army had ‘painted big yellow H’s on the Hindu shops to identify the property of the minority, eighth of the population that it has made it special targets.’ Archer Blood, the ‘dissenting diplomat’, then American Consul General in Dhaka cabled on March 29, 1971 on how the ‘Hindus [were] particular focus of [the] campaign and how the army was ‘going after Hindus with a vengeance.’ Veteran Pakistani journalist Anthony Mascarenhas, who fled to London in order to tell the truth about the Pakistan army wrote in exasperation in his columns in the Sunday Times that the Pakistani military operation had two distinctive features: ‘ One, the cleansing process’, the other ‘rehabilitation effort’ -- ‘turning East Bengal into a ‘docile colony of West Pakistan.’ Sayeedi and his political colleagues had wholeheartedly facilitated all of these; the Maidan congregators were silent on that. It was Sayeedi who had once said of the Hindus of Bangladesh, ‘Why should we feel sad when the Hindu brothers choose to leave our country? Do we mourn when we have indigestion and materials leave our bodies?’ Do we then assume that those in West Bengal who have organised the Maidan rally in Sayeedi’s support and those who have, through their silence given consent to their demands, really support that line? Dr Anirban Ganguly
Dumbbells Newbie

Dumbbells

Posted
Posted

Bangladeshi Hindus should come to India. The supporters of Shabaag movement are very less in numbers. Muslim fringe groups would eventually rule Bangladesh in future. WB and north eastern states would continue to suffer becoz of their illegal occupation.

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...