The Dilemma of National Anthem
Mohammad Abdullah
Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru has written two poems almost at the same time in the early part of the last century that are now adopted as National Anthems by India in 1947 and by Bangladesh in 1972.
During 1947 J. L. Nehru was the instrumental to adopt Bishwa-Kob-Raj-Guru's British tabedar-giri (to remain as puppet) poem as the National Anthem of modern land-piece of India. He was able to manage this poem as the National Anthem by his own will by applying a sort of imposition on the population who were vastly illiterate, and did not know what the National Anthem meant for a liberated country.
At that time Pakistan had no National Anthem and began searching a writer to frame a National Anthem. After utmost search Hafeez Jullendhari was able to give a poem written primarily in Persian was adopted as Pakistan's National Anthem toward the end of Liaquat Ali Khan's days. Immediately this poem was put to the instrumental form with the help of the American composers in 1951 which is still used by Pakistan on official occasions. The National Anthem of Pakistan is never understood by any Pakistani even now because of its Persian origin.
Thus, a Greek song has become the National Anthem of Pakistan for which any Pakistani does Baak-baakum even today. Invariably a bunch of foolish idiotic people live in that country who knows only regional domination by muscle without proper education. The upper chamber is practically some what vacant for them.
Buddhimaan J. L. Nehru adopted Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru's poem because of personal reasons. He was very much passionate, like his father Motilal Nehru, toward Rabindranath Tagore. Thus, J. L. Nehru felt that his daughter must be educated by this super human. Encircling all personal issues became national matter for J. L. Nehru.
Therefore, he did not hesitate to choose a puppet song as the National Anthem of modern India. At that time he was also busy to give a constitution for the newly independent country by adopting British Parliamentary democratic platform in a perennial caste-oriented land. Though Mohammed Iqbal's poem was on the table yet Nehru inclined toward Tagore's puppet song.
Moreover Iqbal's poem was already in the bastard language URDU, a sort of cousin to the bastardized HINDI. There must be a different taste for Nehru between the two poems as he finalized selecting Tagore's poem. Needless to say that Iqbal was a revered personality to Nehru as they discussed the issue of Pakistan after coming out of the Jail in 1934. By that time Iqbal already made a statement about framing Pakistan.
As Nehru claimed that Iqbal never envisioned Pakistan but it came out of the pressure from the extremist group of the Muslims League while Iqbal served as the President of the same party. Though Nehru and Iqbal politically agreed to see undivided British India but some how Nehru did not adopt Iqbal's poem as the National Anthem. This disagreement truly does not justify whether Iqbal actually denied his confession on the creation of Pakistan to Nehru. Shortly thereafter in 1938 Iqbal died.
Many political figures knew very well that Mohammed Ali Jinnah never had congenial relationship with Mohammed Iqbal. It was Jinnah who was the instrumental with the help of Liaquat Ali Khan to overthrow Iqbal from the President position of the Muslim League after both came back from U.K. with afresh plan. By 1933 Jinnah joined Muslim League out of frustration with Nehru-Gandhi-Patel gang.
Liaquat Ali Khan was able to convince Jinnah to return to British India to provide leadership toward framing Pakistan. By 1929 PAKISTAN was a known word to both Jinnah and Liaquat from Choudhury Rehmat Ali. The ouster of Iqbal from Muslim League was enjoyed by Nehru although politically he expressed solidarity with him. Nehru became time serving hypocrite.
It is quite mystery why Nehru inclined toward the puppet poem of Tagore that pleased George V when visited British India in 1911. As soon as this poem was adopted as the National Anthem of modern India, Pakistan sent a strong protest to Nehru Administration. It noted that the poem is compatible as the National Anthem for India because it simply does not comply with the national integrity of Pakistan.
Invariably, till today, it interferes with Pakistan's geographical integrity and a series of protests were made by Pakistan since 1949. In fact the 1949 "No War Pact" offered by Nehru Administration after the occupation of Kashmir by both countries was rejected by Liaquat Administration because of this primary issue. Pakistan could not trust India for No War Pact as apprehended violation and disrespect. Last time known protest sent to India by Pakistan was during the Ziaul Huq's regime. India always remained either cool or overlooked as a part of Hindu habit.
When the Hindu habit spreads in the mind of the administration then it simply does not know what is wrong and what is right as the administration becomes deaf and dumb. Therefore, intelligent Nehru became very much silent on this matter. Disrespecting this issue had always resulted bitter relationship between the two countries. Often, though correct, democratic India does not listen to the legitimate complaints as they have a general tendency to disrespect the neighboring countries.
Legend says that Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto discussed the issue of Indian National Anthem with Indira Gandhi during the Simla Meeting. Since Pakistan was under severe pressure from inside problems with 93,000 surrendered Army the National Anthem issue got faded in 1973. However, Indira Gandhi remembered this matter at a later date. During her second time entering in the Prime Minister's office following the election of December 1980, Indira Gandhi brought the subject of changing National Anthem in the Parliament.
Despite strong support of Indira Gandhi discussion eventually failed to replace the Anthem. Majority of the Parliament did not favor Iqbal's poem. This process has established the validity of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru's poem as the National Anthem. At that time Ziaul Huq regime sent the protest note to India.
The Indian Hindu dominated Parliament agreed that the Nobel Laureate's puppet poem was very healthy. They also ignored the issue of interference with Pakistan's geographical integrity. Even at that time many Parliament members vowed to capture Sind (or Sindh or Sindhu) from Pakistan per desire of Nathuram Godse. Readers may know that Nathuram Godse made an open desire for his ashes to be drowned in the Indus River.
Thus, his ashes will be carried generation to generation until it is placed in the flow of the Indus River. This means Nathuram Godse told before his execution on November 15, 1949 to overrun Pakistan and wipe out from the map by capturing, and then merging with Hindu dominated India. Only then his ashes could be placed in the flow of the River Indus.
Nathuram Godse's opinion became very important while the issue came for the change of National Anthem of India in 1981. Indira Gandhi silently supported this sentiment and remained quiet although she favored Iqbal's poem as India's National Anthem. Being a student of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru how Indira inclined toward Iqbals' poem is a mystery. In 1981 she ordered to scribe Iqbal's poem in Hindi and made public for better communication with the people about the song. Since this attempt was failed it is unlikely that India will ever think about respecting neighbor's sentiment concerning the same National Anthem intact.
As long as the controversial National Anthem is in place Pakistan's former Prime Ministers (at least two of them) since 1973 noted that there is no way to have normal relations with India while the National Anthem is in place.
Rabindranath Tagore is not the National Poet of India. Many Indians consider him as a controversial character. It is amazing that Ghalib is favored than Tagore. India is not willing to diffuse problems with the neighbors. Rather it keeps alive all the problems and tries to ignore the underlying issues. In this context the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 may be mentioned.
India was the first country to recognize Mao-Zhe-Dong's arrival in China in 1949. Since then India built Hindi-Chiney Bhai-Bhai relations until late 1950s. Meanwhile Chinese leaders visited India on several occasions including Premier Chou-En-Lai and bilateral cultural teams. At least Monoj Bose coined two volumes from the bilateral cultural exchanges.
The Chinese leadership had asked to resolve the border dispute which was created by the British in 1849 by annexing a land piece near Kashmir. It was merged with the British Indian administration centered in Calcutta. This was done by the British for their easiness of ruling from one central capital.
After 1949 the Chinese went back to the history and referred to Nehru about the British created problem. Nehru morally agreed each time the Chinese leaders talked about, and promised to look into the matter. China tried to resolve the matter diplomatically until June 1962 with their last effort. They sent notes after notes to resolve the issue which was totally ignored and deliberately overlooked by J. L. Nehru as he was influenced by the as usual "tricky Hindu habit." It may be noted that once Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto mentioned about Nehru as a pure secular and perfect political person as long as no parallel non-Hindu (preferably a Muslim) applicant does not show up for a job position. This means Nehru always inclined for the Hindu applicant if he found two exactly identically qualified applicants having one being Muslim. Under any circumstances Nehru never selected a Muslim if he had an alternative despite having requisite qualifications. Similar observation was made by Nehru's intimate friend Abul Kalam Azad.
The tricky Hindu habit was finally foiled in October 1962 when the Chinese Army captured the disputed land and began marching toward New Delhi. When they were about some 125 miles away from New Delhi at that time Bertrand Russell sent a telegram to Chou-En-Lai requesting him to stop further marching.
At this request the Chinese Army returned to the demarcation line where they should have been with the disputed land. Since then China occupies that land piece and piece prevails though India deliberately shows the map of India containing that land piece which is now under Chinese rule. Invariably this battle was an education for India as they needed such a neighbor to resolve all the underlying problems. Thus, India does not raise head in front of the legal demand of the Chinese. Today large number of Indians does not know the exact reason for the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962.
The Nehru Administration kept the exact reason under hiding to the common people. Thus, nearly every Indian knows that the Chinese are treacherous people and they can stab at the back in the name of friendship. Exactly this was taught by the Nehru Administration to the Indians. The same ideology exists even today within India. Modern Indian leaders know that China deliberately captured their soil. But the Indians never go back to the history and tell their people that they have done mistake by dishonoring promises after promises during the bilateral talks both in New Delhi as well as in Peking.
Some day India needs some sort of education, presumably again, so that they give up controversial National Anthem. It is predicted by many individuals that the day is not far ahead that modern India will split up into pieces based on regionalism and languages. At that time this National Anthem will drown in the Indian Ocean. India has time to reconsider their National Anthem to resolve all underlying problems with their neighbor Pakistan if "peace" is the common goal for the Indians.
The National Anthem of Bangladesh was adopted in early 1972 by unilateral decision of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. There was no debate or discussion about it in the Parliament. Of course the Parliament members then were elected for the Pakistan National Assembly as well as for the former Province of East Pakistan. All India Radio (Aakash Baani) proposed it only one time and Mujib adopted it right away.
Mujib was a very obedient fellow to the top Indian portfolio holders of his time such as Indira Gandhi, Durga Prasad Dhar, Purshottam Narayan Haksar, and many others. D. P. Dhar was a real driver for Mujib until his demise. P. N. Haksar got the job for doing the same until Mujib was alive. Aakash Baani declared devaluation of the Bangladesh currency (succeeding from Pakistani currency) by 58% through single promulgation on 16th December 1971 in their 8:00 p.m. regular Bengali news. The news prior to that at 7:45 p.m. was in Oriya language but gave no indication of the devaluation of the Bangladesh currency or the new National Anthem of Bangladesh.
The Bengali news gave the headline of surrendering Pakistan Army to the Indian Army at the Ramna Race Course Maidan that took place around 4:30 p.m. local (Dacca) time. The news continued with the preference to the National Anthem for the poem of Bishwa-KobiRaj-Guru. Mujib declared this song officially as the National Anthem of Bangladesh in 1972. These wonderful formal decisions of a nascent country came from Aakash Baani in a single news reading from the Mitra Bahini's broadcasting Radio Center known as All India Radio in New Delhi. The Mitra Bahini was the Indian Looting Army (ILA) in Bangladesh during 1971-1972 days.
Exactly this way National Anthem was imposed on the shoulder of the Bangladeshis which Mujib just regularized in a formal manner the first ten lines of the poem, and then incorporated in the constitution. The 58% devaluation of the Bangladesh currency was a blow for the economy that came from the same news. Overall this is the ugly democratic face of the Indian hegemony. Being a diehard supporter of Mujib I pondered for a while and failed to understand the affection of his lieutenants for the new country. Always I questioned about the problem of the leadership that we saw in post liberation period until Mujib came back from the Pakistani custody. Even in the presence of Mujib, I felt that the people of Bangladesh have imported a crocodile by driving away the tiger.
A few political figures made mild remarks about the unilateral finalization of the National Anthem but that was not assertive at all. Many of those figures mentioned about the poems of Dwijendralal Roy, Kazi Nazrul Islam, and Jibonanondo Das. Since then I have been politely surveying the popularity of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru's song as National Anthem among all levels of people. I found that so-called certificate holders, regardless, favor the poem as National Anthem and mentions about no alternative.
These people talk about literary value almost outright and bring a Nobel Laureate in the fore front to defend it. Only a few I found expressed unhappiness citing many reasons. The so-called certificate holders or the educated people of Bangladesh had too much difficulty in pronunciation that hardly they could utter each word perfectly with proper accent for the first six lines or so. Only a few could complete the entire National Anthem of ten lines of the poem by breaking the tongue.
Absolutely no labor class or less educated people had any feeling for the selection of the National Anthem. They did not bother about it at all and had no feeling about the song or the type of the song. It appears that the city dwellers probably more aware about the National Anthem than the people living in the country side. In Bangladesh, over 80% people live in the country side. They do not understand the underlying meaning of the song except for the first two lines. Nearly none could utter profoundly the National Anthem as a flow of tongue or obvious practice.
Almost all the common people of Bangladesh do not know about the writer of their National Anthem. Many of them do not know from where the writer came as often compatriots exchange their original district home town or village or thana (police station), etc.
Nearly none could correctly say when exactly the poem was written. No one could ascertain why and when this poem was fabricated by Tagore. Many did not know about the 1905 promulgation of "Lord Curzon" on united Bengal although a visible chunk of the students of the University of Dacca attend "Curzon" Hall. Clearly the song belonged to a special class of people. It cannot be generic or be made generic at all under any circumstance.
Based on observations, the National Anthem of Bangladesh is not popular at all. It is not easy to tame the tongue and align with this poem for the people of Bangladesh. In general, the people of Bangladesh have heavy regional accent that we cannot delete or remove from our daily life. Overall this poem is not "user friendly" regardless of the literal value. The associated music is not dynamic. It cannot be made dynamic as it contains frictional strings and as such the tongue breaks and halts often for the perfection of the pronunciation.
This poem does not reflect the history of Bangladesh. It does not provide any information about our freedom struggle during 1971 and, thus, does not comprise the martyrs of the liberation process or the brutal bloodshed of the masses. The song apparently looks like an artistic goal of a musical fan describing the literary values of the natural scenery observed in some parts of modern West Bengal, particularly in Bolpur or Shantipur or Krishnanagar areas. It does not document the nature or events of Bangladesh or the Bangladeshi people encountering frequent boating, regardless of the rainy season or fertility of the soil. Additionally the writer of this song, Rabindranath Tagore, did not have any connection with Bangladesh.
There is no connection with Bangladesh with his descendents or other distant relatives. He did not envision Bangladesh as a country at any given time when he was alive. In his dictionary there was no BANGLADESH at all. Even he had no spectrum of UNITED BENGAL. Rabindranath Tagore favored bastard HINDI language as the National Language of independent British occupied India if the land piece is liberated at all. The Poet Laureate had over sure suspicion whether independence can be achieved from the British as he never supported freedom for any human bonded with slavery under the British occupation.
Why Rabindranath was the supporter of the British? The answer to this question is a puzzle. Rabindranath's forefather was loyal to the British by welcoming them in 1757. The ancestor was very much addicted to ENGLISH and then getting attracted to Robert Clive gang. He was the interpreter and communicator for local chamchas (lieutenants) of the British.
As known for him by 1765 a fluent speaker in English became visible person in Robert Clive's pleasure house in Calcutta being a representative of Maharaja Krishna Chandra. After Robert Clive returned to Britain to face the British court the ancestor was attracted quickly by Warren Hastings. By 1772 he became official translator for him. Thus, the ancestor of Rabindranath began to make fortune for his descendents. The chunk of the money though came from Murshidabad's defeated personalities including the betrayer group members.
Munni Begum (1733 – 1820) gave tons of money to Robert Clive to put her son in the puppet throne of Murshidabad. This palace dancer lived long to stage "palace politics" with money and the line of royal descendents. Rabindranath's ancestor got money from the British which indirectly came from the royal palace in Murshidabad via British hand. The British used locally earned money for their own benefit and used local people against each other. This is called KOIER TELEY KOI VAJA (frying fish in fish oil). It is interesting that the British writers have documented such events that went against Robert Clive, though founded for the sake of British Empire.
The local agents like Rabindranath's ancestor and many others including Maharaja Krishna Chandra became very passive in the history of united Bengal. British rewarded them with Zamidari and tons of money for their support. In this way Maharaja Krishna Chandra became MAHARAJA possessing tons of acres of lands and he is remembered associating his name with the city of Krishnanagar, located in the district of Nadia in West Bengal. Rabindranath's ancestor also not only got lucrative cash for the translating job but also got Zamidari at the same time at various places within united Bengal from the British.
Eventually the descendents of Maharaja Krishana Chandra were dissociated from the descendents of the ancestor of Rabindranath. Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru never mentioned anything in his writing about his ancestry including the branches settled in Pathurighata at the bank of the River Hooghly (Bhagirathi) in the district of Hooghly. This is the way the TAGORE family became rich and high visible KORNODHAR of the Bengali speaking people at a later date.
There was no trace of any richness or bright part of education with the Tagore family prior to 1765. Their shrewd approach inclining toward British gave a solid leverage to elevate as a visible potential front line cultured family. How such a family can write against the British?
It is absolutely true that if there was no division of Bengal then there would have been no Bangladesh. Therefore, geographical location was a necessity to portray the people or inhabitant as Bangladeshis. In this way we needed to be free from the British and subsequently tearing the ties with Pakistan that materialized our Bangladesh. The entire process was blood involved whether be in 1947 or in 1971. The fact is that in 1971 we had to shed tons of blood to achieve a new flag.
Regarding the National Anthem, the people of Bangladesh need a fresh one to become lively and spirited with full of energy. The song must be dynamic, and must reflect the process of liberation of the country. It must talk about the freedom struggle and freedom of speech. The song must reflect the soil, water, air, dust, etc. of Bangladesh including the people, in general. It should talk about the faith too including perennial culture, tradition, etc. The writer must be Bangladeshi by origin and the heritage must trace to Bangladesh only.
The writer can have any religion or belong to any faith as a part of our people. The music of the National Anthem must be popular and can be sung by any level of compatriots without having class. It must be accessible to old, young, children, male, female, etc. group of people of the country. There must be no tongue breaking language and most certainly the accent must not be imported from another soil.
Nearly many countries of the world have National Anthem reflecting faith, type of heritage, freedom struggle if any, culture, tradition, etc. We need exactly similar reflecting everything MADE IN BANGALDESH. I feel that the day is not far ahead when compatriots will raise voice against the literary poem of Bishwa-Kobi-Raj-Guru and feel for the change to have a fully energized NATIONAL ANTHEM for Bangladesh.
The foregoing opinion is expressed regardless of the opinion given by the political leaders within or outside Bangladesh. Whether one writer writes two National Anthems for two countries that does not mean that the Bangladeshis are in the same frequency with the hegemony. The political leaders express often to please or satisfy the so-called bilateral issues. For the sake of changing the National Anthem the people of Bangladesh must not compromise with what we have to say in front of the Indians or the Indian leaders.
The crook Indian opportunist leaders need not be satisfied by the people of Bangladesh. The people of Bangladesh need to do what is good for Bangladesh. This is regardless of what the Indians have to say in the internal affairs of Bangladesh. Any Indian citizen or the Indian leaders must not poke nose in the Bangladeshi affairs at all as the Bangladeshi do not poke nose in the Indian affairs. The Indians should keep off the Bangladeshi median.
http://bangladesh-web.com/view.php?hidDate=2006-05-09&hidType=OPT&hidRecord=0000000000000000105786
__._,_.___
