Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi
I would not have written again about the incidents that led to the secession of East Pakistan and the creation of the new state of Bangladesh had I not noticed some points raised by Safi H. Jannaty in an article published in Saudi Gazette on March 12. His article was in response to my column titled “Raking up the past in Bangladesh will help no one” which appeared earlier in this newspaper. In the article, I tried to disprove some points raised by Syed Badrul Ahsan, assistant editor in chief of Bangladesh’s The Daily Observer newspaper.
Jannaty pointed out that I must have read in detail about the incidents that occurred during the nine dark months of 1971 or that I might even have come across the victims of the war during my diplomatic stint in Bangladesh. Regarding this, I would like to say honestly that I lived in Dhaka for more than three years during which time I met with a large number of prominent figures, including politicians, businessmen, university professors and students. I met many ministers, senior ministry officials as well as ordinary citizens not only in my capacity as a diplomat but also because of my academic interest as a researcher.
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the father of the nation of Bangladesh, was one of the top personalities about whom I studied as part of my thesis for my doctorate that I obtained from India’s Aligarh Muslim University. Among the leaders whom I met for this purpose were Sheikh Hasina, the prime minister of Bangladesh and daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. At that time, Sheikh Hasina was an opposition leader. She spoke a lot about her father and showed me the site where Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated. Neither Sheikh Hasina nor anyone else I met in those days ever said anything about the exaggerated accounts of what are being circulated today about genocide, the raping of men and women and so on. I never read anything of this sort published by newspapers and magazines in those days.
However, this does not mean that there had been no crimes or mistakes or excesses that took place in those days. But it was apparent then that people were holding fast to the ideal of "forget and forgive" envisaged by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
It is nice to see that Jannaty agreed with me even though it is pertaining to the comparison between what happened to Korean women during the World War II and Bangladeshi women during the civil war that led to the secession of East Pakistan. However, he said that he does not understand my disagreement with Ahsan, and, therefore, I would like to clarify my viewpoints in this regard.
I would reemphasize the fact that I strongly denounced and rejected all atrocities that happened against women irrespective of their nationalities, religions and origins. But I opposed the tendency of totally disregarding the crimes perpetrated against Bihari women, especially the atrocities against Bihari men and women even after the end of the civil war. I said and will continue to assert with all sincerity that there should be no differentiation among victims whether they are Bengalis or Biharis. The tendency on the part of any writer or journalist to shed light on the crimes committed against Bengali women and ignore the same atrocities perpetrated against Bihari women is unjust, inhuman and totally unacceptable. I simply say that there is no credibility for those who do this.
It is obvious that Jannaty neither believes in nor supports the principle or ideology of “forget and forgive,” which is not the demand made by me but by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who endorsed and implemented it. This was after he found that it was unjust to try Pakistanis and their collaborators and at the same time not take penal action against the atrocities committed by the militias associated with his Awami League Party.
This example set by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was later followed in many other countries across the world, including Yemen and Lebanon. It has been proved that this ideal is the best way to put an end to sedition. Similarly, with regard to those who are now facing trial, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman never classified any of them as war crimes suspects. In fact, there were only 159 Pakistani soldiers declared to be war crime suspects at that time and even those soldiers were later released.
The ongoing war crimes trials in Bangladesh have been severely criticized by many international human rights bodies. It has been pointed out that these trials do not meet even basic international criteria and standards and that they are politically motivated trials aimed at getting rid of political opponents. Moreover, these trials are also indirectly offensive to the founder of the nation Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who coined the concept of “forget and forgive.”
The scandals that have accompanied these war crime trials are the best example of the ulterior motives behind the trials. The latest of these scandals was the strong criticism made by the chief justice of the Supreme Court against the public prosecution and his expression of doubts about the evidence presented by it especially in the case of Mir Quasem Ali, and the intervention of two ministers seeking to prevent the chief justice from examining the case. All of this points to the clandestine role of the government in the pronouncement of a verdict against opposition leaders. This was evident in the act of the Supreme Court in upholding the death sentence against Ali even after the chief justice expressed his doubts as to whether there was really any substantial evidence against him.
— Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi is a former Saudi diplomat who specializes in Southeast Asian affairs. He can be reached at algham@hotmail.com
