Why did India help in 1971?
By Shah Mohammed Saifuddin (Maruf), Bangladesh
Unlike our other neighbours India has a special place in our history
because of its help in our liberation war. When the Pakistani
military was murdering hundreds of thousands of unarmed people and
raping the women of the then East Pakistan, India came forward with
its helping hand and contributed to arming and training the mukti
bahini. Almost 10 million people took shelter in India, especially
in the states adjacent to East Pakistan border. Nobody in Bangladesh
questions the fact that we got help from India but many question the
nature of the help. Was it selfless help or India had a strategic
interest in helping Bangladesh?
With a view to find out the truth we have to analyze what India
gained from our freedom struggle and its attitude toward Bangladesh
after our liberation war. Let us examine the entire thing from
strategic, economic, and political point of views.
Strategic point of view
India's peculiar geographic position constituted a major threat to
its national security. Due to the geographic location of then East
Pakistan, the seven sisters were completely isolated from the
mainland. A small corridor, popularly known as chicken neck, was the
only passage that could be used for traffic movement. Militarily,
India was pretty vulnerable especially due to Chinese presence along
the border. The war that was fought between India and China taught
India the lesson that faster troops mobility is the only way to win
a war. So, India needed transit facility through East Pakistan to
transport troops and logistics faster to defend its vulnerable North
Eastern states. Besides that, Pakistan was playing a vital role in
instigating the insurgents in Assam and elsewhere to break up the
entire region. The Indian military strategists were out of options
and didn't know how the North Eastern region would be saved. The
Hawkish politicians in India came to the conclusion that breaking up
Pakistan is the only way to save the militarily insecure North
Eastern region. By doing so,
•They could weaken Pakistan and reduce the threat level.
•Recapture the Pakistani portion of Kashmir
•Create a new state that would be militarily and economically weak
and provide the much needed transit for troops and logistics
transportation
•Project India as a regional superpower and warn all elements
inimical to India's security that India had the power to defend
itself.
Economic point of view
India also had an economic objective to dismember Pakistan. India
was a country with huge population and needed additional resources
to uplift its economy. The economic cooperation with Pakistan was
all but encouraging. Besides that, the water resources of the
Himalayas were needed for India for irrigation and power generation.
Due to Pakistan's strong military, India was unable to use the
resources unilaterally. Despite being a third world nation, Pakistan
was a huge economic market that was able to absorb millions of
dollars worth of Indian commodities. But the hostility between the
two nations retarded the possibility of a robust economic
cooperation between the two nations.
Indian policymakers thought that if they could break Pakistan and
create a new and weaker Bangladesh then they would be able to gain
unrestricted access to its economic market. India knew that as a new
nation, Bangladesh would need cheap industrial products to revive
its economy. So, there was a tremendous potential for economic
cooperation between the two nations. India also wanted to get
transit through Bangladesh to transport raw materials for its North
Eastern states. The economically backward North Eastern region
needed more investment and various products to energize its economy.
So, the Indians thought Bangladesh would be much more beneficial for
Indian economy than East Pakistan. The economic calculation was very
accurate because India managed to sell hundreds of millions of
dollars worth of cheap products to Bangladesh both legally and
illegally. They destroyed the thriving jute industry of Bangladesh
to build their own right after our independence.
India flooded the local Bangladeshi market with its products and
offered millions of dollars more as loans to buy Indian commodities.
We were reduced to a trading nation and almost destroyed the very
basis of our own industry. India encouraged smuggling along the Indo-
Bangla border so the government of Bangladesh had to close the
border to stop the rampant smuggling to save the local traders.
India never wanted an economically prosperous Bangladesh rather it
wanted to use us as a market for its own products and in the process
make us dependent on them.
If we look at the present situation, the lopsided trade relation
between the two nations speaks volume of the Indian intention to
help us in 1971. Bangladesh is an open market economy and allows
duty free access for Indian products to our market. But India
follows a restricted policy when it comes to importing Bangladeshi
products and imposed numerous tariffs and para-tariffs on the
Bangladeshi goods. The yawning trade imbalance is a testament to the
fact that India never wanted an economically self-sufficient
Bangladesh.
Political point of view
Former Indian foreign secretary Mr. Dixit said, "We helped in the
liberation of Bangladesh in mutual interest, it was not a favour,"
His statement is clear evidence that India did not help Bangladesh
on humanitarian ground. India had a long-term strategic plan to
dismember Pakistan for its own gain. India had cultivated deep
political relation with the disgruntled elements within the
erstwhile East Pakistan. [1] As per a senior RAW intelligence
officer, "Bangladesh was the result of a 10 year long promotion of
dissatisfaction against the rulers of Pakistan".
This goes to prove that helping Bangladesh was not an instantaneous
decision of India rather it was a carefully designed strategic plan
that was executed in pinpoint precision.
One of the top bosses of RAW, K. Sankaran Nair, was responsible for
training the erstwhile East Pakistani officers in guerrilla warfare.
He also established excellent relation with Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
The relation was maintained via a RAW operative Mr. Banerjee. RAW
even funded the 1970s election, in which Sheikh Mujib emerged as the
winner [2].
But after the liberation, things did not go the way India had
planned. Mujib was assassinated and Awami League was ousted from the
power. General Ziaur Rahman came to power and adopted an anti India
foreign and defense policy to drag Bangladesh out of Indian sphere
of influence. He established good economic and political relation
with America and China. He also repaired relations with the Middle
Eastern countries and created a huge opportunity for the Bangladeshi
workers in the Arab nations. Money started to pour in and the
economy got better. He amended the constitution to give it an
Islamic flavour in a country where 90% people were Muslims. The
Indian policymakers observed the political development in Bangladesh
and clearly understood that things were getting worse as far as
Indian interest was concerned.
In the meantime, General Ziaur Rahman took various measures to
upgrade the military. A close defense relation was established
between Bangladesh and China. This irked the military establishment
of India. They considered it a hostile act and found it hard to
digest. The disgruntled elements in Delhi decided to create a rebel
group in Chittagong hill tracts to keep Bangladesh under pressure
and drain as much resources of this newly born poor country as
possible. Shanti bahini played havock with the lives and properties
of the people in CHT. General Zia quickly decided to populate CHT
with Bengalees to maintain the territorial integrity of Bangladesh.
In the meantime, India forcefully occupied South Talpatty
disregarding Bangladesh's request for a joint survey to determine
the ownership of the Island. [3] General Zia was assassinated in
1981 and many observers believe that RAW had a hand in the incident.
General Ershad came to power in 1982 and more or less followed the
same foreign policy as General Zia. But Ershad knew he should not
annoy India beyond a certain limit so a tendency to keep India in
good humour was obvious in his India policy. During his tenure, he
agreed to abolish the guarantee clause from the water sharing treaty
signed by General Zia. It went against our national interest because
after abolishment of the guarantee clause, India reduced the water
supply even further and that affected our agriculture and ecology.
But the fact of the matter is even General Ershad couldn't take a
fully pro-Indian stance due to public pressure. He had to continue
the military modernization and amended the constitution to declare
Islam as the state religion. This drew ire from the top leaders of
India. Ershad didn't even try to take any initiative to give transit
to India fearing wide spread protest across the country.
Actually, the Indian leaders knew that the only party that was able
to meet the Indian strategic demands was Awami League. They never
stopped keeping relations with Awami League and provided all sorts
of logistis support to Sheikh Hasina. According to some well-
informed observers, India provided Tk. 300 crore to Awami League to
win the 1996 election(Weekly Shugondha, 26th April, 1996). India's
clandestine support for a particular party is a testament to the
fact that India had a strategic reason to help Bangladesh in 1971.
If India's help was altruistic in nature, India would have tried to
win the hearts and minds of the people of Bangladesh but they never
felt the need to do that and continued with their policy to
clandestinely help bring Awami League to power. Even today, India
leaves no stone unturned to malign Bangladesh. The Indian foreign
ministry spends millions of dollars to hire foreign journalists to
make fictitious reports to portray Bangladesh as Taliban
sympathizer. Fortunately, Bangladesh took quick action to hang a few
mis-guided Mullahs who were creating some disturbances. Bangladesh
even signed various treaties to help the international community to
combat terrorism.
More can be written to prove that India's help in 1971 was not an
altruistic one rather it was for gaining strategic advantages. India
has an ambitious vision of becoming a world power but how can they
achieve their goal if they cannot convince their neighbours that
their intentions are benign? Using force to subjugate the weaker
neighbours is not the way to go to establish a relation based on
mutual trust and respect.
References :
1.RAW: Top-Secret Failures, p: 5
2.Ibid. , p: 8
3.Limits of Diplomacy: Bangladesh, Partha. S. Ghosh
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
