HALF a century plus, the breakup of Pakistan occurred into two states i.e. Bangladesh and Pakistan. Pakistan failed as a nation. The article discusses the genesis of the problem which prompted such events that the country broke up. The geography plays an important role in the governance of countrys and moulding geo-strategic milieu. The countries like Russia could not hold on to Alaska and sold it to the United States, so is the position of Crimea for Russia. The authors/founders in the 1947 Lahore Resolution had rightly said that the Muslim majority areas in the subcontinent in the East and the West be converted to sovereign states.
Somewhere in 1946 our founding fathers, the very leadership at that time desired to be in a federation. Thus, the creation of Pakistan inherited this major fault line. From the beginning the rulers of India led by the Congress Party accepted the partition of India on the perception and false thinking that Pakistan will become a failed state within six months and will be clamoring to rejoin. In spite of the daunting challenges of Hindu-Muslim riots, killing and infringement of the financial resources, the bungling in the Red Cliff Award and prompting Sikhs leadership to revolt against Jinnah’s proposal to have autonomous Sikh state within Pakistan, State of Pakistan managed to govern and stabilize itself due to the dedication of the people of Pakistan from all segments and ensure that the Indian designs to crumble Pakistan in its early stages are thwarted.
What went wrong? It was extremely difficult to govern two independent wings of the country 1000 miles apart with the enemy territory within. The impact of geography on strategic, regional and global scenarios is profound. Historically, some countries are slaves of geography. Pakistan from day one has been impacted by its location and the interest of the greater powers in this region. Not only strategically important, this land is rich with minerals and precious metals. Situated at the crossroads of three major powers—Russia, China, and India—Pakistan serves as both a door and a fulcrum. Importantly, all three are nuclear powers, as is Pakistan itself. Consequently, these powers vie for strategic control over whoever rules Pakistan.
The weakest point in the geography of Pakistan had been the location of the eastern province i.e. East Pakistan. This weakness was further aggravated by the policies of our political West Pakistani elite, till 1946 they were part of the Congress or collision partners. They only joined Muslim League with the change of wind in 1946 elections. The political tug of war between the western and eastern wings’ politicians has cost Pakistan heavily, and delayed the constitution making till 1956. In the intervening period, civilian bureaucracy in conjunction with the establishment, managed to get hold of corridors of power. The martial law of Ayub and later the concept of basic democracies totally delineated the politicians of the eastern wing. In this they saw no space. The formation of the Jugtu Front in the fifties and later total sweep in provincial elections, rout of Muslim League from the landscape of eastern wing politics should have been an eye opener. It was not so. Whereas India right from 1947 had tried every possible tool to damage Pakistan.
Hindutva is the prime objective of both Congress and BJP. They are two faces of the same coin. The objective of the ruling elite, dominated by Brahmins of India, always remained to make Akhand Bharat, a fictional dream of Hindu Empire. Even today BJP is endeavoring to change history. A lot of money and effort are being poured into changing the entire panorama of India’s past history. Muslim rulers are being portrayed as plunders and debauches who ruled India. Yet, the historical past cannot be obliterated. The 1965 War between India and Pakistan exposed the weakness Pakistan had in the eastern wing. The politicians of the eastern wing felt they were totally at the mercy of India had they been attacked. The perception permeated into the minds of the people and leaders of East Pakistan that their future is not with West Pakistan. This perception was fully exploited by the Indian leadership. Mrs. Gandhi, in the Lok Sabha in February 1970, stated that India was fully prepared to intervene in Pakistan to ensure their strategic objectives. During a meeting with President Nixon in Washington in November 1971, while Nixon advised her to refrain from aggression, she diplomatically replied, ‘We know how to protect our interests.
The political follies of General Yahya the President, Bhutto’s lust of power and Mujibur Rehman’s political ambitions eventually created such a political impasse allowing India to take advantage of this situation. While the Pakistan People’s Party and the Awami League were negotiating in March 1971, the Indian intelligence was active behind the scene with the leadership of Awami League to ensure that these negotiations fail.
On the military front, the strategic planning was faulty. The military plans did not match with the resources and ground realities. The wise advice of Sahibzada Yaqub Khan, the then Commander Eastern Command was ignored. The concept of defence of East Pakistan lies in West Pakistan’s offensive against India was totally faulty and not workable as the later events of 1971 testified. Pakistan never had reserves and forces that could make meaningful dents in the Indian western front, that, India could be forced to abandon East Pakistan. Pakistan was militarily weakened due to nine months of civil war as well as the apathy of the western powers. Posting of Lt. General Niazi as Commander Eastern Command was the last straw.
At the diplomatic front, Pakistan failed to listen to its friends all along from 1965 to 71 to seek political solutions. The visit of Mr. Bhutto along with military leadership to China just before the onset of hostilities and the Chinese advice to seek political solution was not conveyed to President Yahya Khan; rather, he was told that China will support Pakistan in all eventualities, which wasn’t the case. The United States Consul General Dacca dispatches of 1970 and 71, now declassified, reveal the duplicity of the United States in dealing with the issues of East Pakistan. The United States was prepared for a separate East Pakistan. On the other hand, the (former) Soviet Union offered full support to India under Defence Pact, and allowed free hand to Mrs. Gandhi.
The tragedy of East Pakistan was a great judgment of error and total ignorance of the strategic and political fault lines by the leadership of Pakistan both military and civil. Political parties other than PPP are equally responsible. Mrs. Gandhi’s cry and perception and announcements that two-nation theory has been dumped proved wrong as well. India under Hindutva today and the existence of Bangladesh as the Islamic Republic is the testimony that the two-nation theory is fully alive. Yet, Bangladesh will remain vulnerable to Indian hegemony and Indian desire to keep her under control. The security of Bangladesh lies with ties with Pakistan, in a confederation or a Union like the EU. This will immediately extend nuclear cover to Bangladesh, strengthening political and strategic importance. Underestimating Pakistan by any power and indulging in aggression will be a colossal strategic error. The leadership who do not learn from history, the history makes them repeat itself.
—The author is a decorated veteran of 1965 and 1971 wars, has over 32 years of combat and General Staff experience, coupled with over 30 years of corporate experience. He is a column writer on strategy, trade, industry and TV analyst.
Email: [email protected]
views expressed are writer’s own.
