Intellectual Collaborators: From Dr. M. Rashiduzzaman
ifa...@erols.com
The following is posted for Dr. Rashiduzzaman by me.
December 19, 97
For DEJANEWS/SCB
A REBUTTAL FROM DR. M. RASHIDUZZAMAN
An Internet debate over the events and personalities of the past has been
woefully turned into a vicious on line inquisition and mud slinging.
Zafor Ullah, Jamal Hasan and their cronies appear to have been divinely
sub-contracted to say who are the patriots and who are the Pakistani
collaborators of the 1971 liberation struggle! They have become the
muckrakers of Bangladesh history foraging for rumor, mud and innuendo
wherever they can grab it with a calculated motive to tarnish me. My
challengers may be patriots but their nationalistic fanaticism is
unfathomable to most Western and non-Western readers. Their recent "orgy
of patriotism" are nearly all irrelevant, disingenuous and terribly
misleading with deceptive statements, vindictive gestures and, as usual,
simplistic but motivated slogans. Bangladesh narratives, peddled by the
over-jealous patriots is littered with lies, slander, and contempt for
individual discretion, and vengeance only comparable to the fascistic
proclivities, of one sort or the other. Alarmed by such megalomaniac and
belligerent hyper-nationalism, many years ago disenchanted philosopher
George Bernard Shaw said: "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel!"
Appalled by the ravaging viciousness of the mean minded characters in
India, who bullied each other, Gandhi, the great non-violent leader,
angrily denounced them as the "latrine inspectors" scavenging for smudge!
Initial Response to Some Specific Charges: With that landscape of the
vindictive jingoists who are using the Internet, as a vehicle of tossing
worst kind of personal abuse, baseless imputation and barrage of
vitriolic against me, let me answer to some of the charges that recently
surfaced in the DEJANEWS/Society and Culture of Bangladesh. 1. According
to Dr. Mozammel Huq Khan's posting (DEJANEWS), Mr. M.A. Muhith, in his
recent book (1996), mentioned that, according to a "rumor", I "took upon
myself the shameful responsibility" of providing my visiting colleagues
"some appointments and forums" (presumably cited in pp. 416-417 of Mr.
Muhith's book). I haven't heard about such a book until his allegation
came to my notice; nor did I get an opportunity of discussing it with the
author. Mr. Muhith was two years senior to me in the University, and I
have had the opportunity of knowing him as a respectable and
conscientious gentleman over the span of the last 40 years. Until and
unless I actually see that book and the alleged references, I should
refrain from any conclusive remark on this issue. Meanwhile, I can say
that whether it was Muhith or someone else making such an allegation, it
is totally false and baseless that I arranged any appointment for any
pro-Pakistani lobbyist in New York in 1971. A personal recollection of
rumors and gossip, no matter who is its author, cannot be valid evidence
to charge or condemn someone. In my Amitech rejoinder (11/12/97) to Jamal
Hasan's malicious posting in the Amitech, I did mention that my contact
with some Bangladeshi colleagues (who came for lobbying in support of
Pakistan in 1971) created misunderstanding (which I am explaining below),
and several Bangladeshi expatriates were responsible for spreading
rumors, and reporting against me. And I also said that I am aware of a
few of such individuals in America. I will be disappointed if a person
of Muhith's standing would record such insinuation (without
verification), which are now being peevishly used by a bunch of motivated
individuals, to vilify me. Those were still my early months in the United
States, I knew few people, outside my academic circles. Much hearsay,
rumors and veiled allusion still prevail about the Bangladeshi activists
in North America in 1971! I don't want to get into such gossips! May be I
should reserve them for my own memoirs! 2. I have already stated that a
number of Bangladeshis, some lobbying for Bangladesh independence, and
some lobbying for united Pakistan, visited the Columbia University in
1971, and I had met with most of them since I was the only Bangladeshi
senior fellow there at that time. Among the visiting Bangladeshis whom I
met or talked included Dr. A.R. Mullick, Justice Nurul Islam, Dr. Sajjad
Hussein, Abu Sayed Choudhury, Fakir Sahabuddin, Dr. Fatima Sadeque, Dr.
Mohar Ali and Dr. Kazi Din Mohammad. 3. I can still recall how I came to
know about Dr. Sajjad Hussein, Dr. Din Mohammad and Dr. Mohar Ali,
visiting New York in 1971. One day a senior Bangldeshi diplomat (whom I
knew and the Bangladeshi diplomats were still with the Pakistan embassies
then) at the Pakistan Mission to the UN, New York rang me to say that
they were coming to solicit support for Pakistan, and he felt that it
was something that they should not do at that critical juncture. It was
probably a day/two after their arrival, some Bangladeshis went to their
hotel room to block them from going out for any lobbying, and the police
had arrived to arrest the protestors. At that time, the same senior
diplomat, concerned about the unpleasant incident occurring at that
hotel, called me rather frantically to implore Dr. Sajjad Hussein and
others, not to lobby, and somehow, persuade them to leave New York
without pleading for Pakistan. That's how I first came to meet them in
New York City, and I asked them to visit me. In our face to face meeting,
I told Dr. Sajjad Hussein and the other colleagues that in the light of
what was happening in Bangladesh, they should leave the United States
immediately without any lobbying for Pakistan. To the best of my
recollection, they had left the United States soon after our meeting, and
I had no further contact with them. Before his death, Dr. Sajjad Hussein
published his memoirs of 1971, where he admitted that the Bengali
resistance in the United States was too strong for them to do any
significant pro-Pakistani urging. A Personal Note About A Few Visitng
Individuals Whom I Had Met In New York In 1971: (a) Both Dr. A.R. Mullick
and Dr. Sajjad Hussein were pretty senior to me. Dr. A.R. Mullick offered
me a chair at Chittagong University when he became the Vice-Chancellor
there, and I still remember his kindness to me. While visiting me, Dr.
Mullick took me apart from his entourage, and asked me to find some
visiting academic position since, at that stage, he was not sure which
way the Bangladesh movement would go in the future. He felt a little
embarrassed to personally look for a job while he was seeking American
support for the liberation of Bangladesh. Indeed, my initiative led to a
visiting fellowship for Dr. Mullick at a respectable university in the
United States, which he was supposed to take up later. However, the
circumstances changed when Bangladesh became independent and fortune
smiled on him, and, obviously, he did not need that fellowship! Even in
his memoirs (presented to me by a common friend), Dr. Mullick touched
upon that visiting academic position, although he did not acknowledge my
small contribution in that venture! (b) I was not a direct student of
Dr. Sajjad Hussein, but those who studied at Dhaka University through
1950's and 1960's knew him as a teacher of teachers, and a gentleman of
gentlemen, a source of inspiration to many. I joined Dhaka University as
a faculty in 1958, and applied for a Commonwealth Scholarship (second
batch) in 1960, and I still remember, how helpful Dr. Hussein was to the
East Pakistani candidates during the interview. For the Dhaka University
teachers who proceeded to England in those days, it was almost a ritual
to look up to Dr. Hussein for tips how to live in that part of the world.
Having been selected as a Commonwealth Scholar, I visited two senior
professors at Dhaka University for advice about English living as a
foreign student: one was Dr. Hussein, and the other was Professor
Mufazzal Haider Chowdhury (killed in 1971), who was already known as my
teacher at Jagannath College. Dr. Hussein was always very kind to me
while I was teaching at Dhaka University. (b) Dr. Din Mohammad was not my
direct teacher but I knew him as someone from a neighboring locality
outside Dhaka City, and had common friends and relatives. (c) Dr. Mohar
Ali was two-year senior to me, and I had the privilege of knowing him as
a brilliant student, a respectable colleague and an excellent historian.
He was very helpful and hospitable to me and my wife when we studied in
England; at that time, he had already finished his Ph.D. but extended his
stay to study Bar-at-Law. I have had no regrets, and no second thought
about inviting Dr. Sajjad Hussein, Dr. Din Mohammad and Dr. Mohar Ali at
my New York apartment in one evening in 1971. My meeting with them had
no element of collaborating with what was happening in Bangladesh. Even
if the whole events of 1971 are resurrected today, and if Dr. Sajjad
Hussein is brought alive from his grave, I would not hesitate to do the
same in the similar circumstances, no matter what happens to me! Early in
1972, when I applied for my Bangladesh passport, the same senior diplomat
(who sought my help to hold off Dr. Hussein from lobbying) in the new
Bangladesh Mission (possibly with the observer status then), gave me the
Bangladesh passport. He was courteous, and remembered the circumstances
of Dr. Sajjad Hussein and my colleagues visiting me. Those who know me
well enough are aware that I respect my elders, I cultivate a sense of
gratitude for those who are kind to me, and I never mix personal
friendship with politics. My home in Dhaka and in the United States has
always been a rendezvous of the nationalists, radicals, bureaucrats,
politicians and rightists, and it will always remain so as long as I am
alive! If it raises controversies and doubts about me, I could not care
less! Responding to A Few More Untenable Allegations by Mozammel H. Khan
and Farid Idris What Dr. Mozammel H. Khan talks about the March 1971 AAS
meeting in Washington , is confusing to say the least. Before he made an
accusation, though supposedly based on a publication, he should have
checked the full facts. He could have made queries at the American
Association for Asian Studies (AAS) headquarter in Michigan. Most
participants of that Conference/Panel are still alive! I remember it was
the AAS annual meeting, which coincided with the days immediately after
the March 1971 crackdown. It was a Panel on Pakistan (such panels are
pre-determined months ahead, and only the members and registered guests
can attend such discussion), and my own presentation was on East
Pakistan's political and economic grievances against West Pakistan; there
were other participants in the Panel including a Pakistani scholar.
Couple of Bangladeshi members of the audience brought the Pakistani
military crackdown news to the attention of the panelists and
participants. A sharp exchange of arguments followed between the
Pakistanis and Bengalis (all of the Bangladeshi participants including
myself and Sajjad Yusuf disagreed with some of the comments of the
Pakistani scholars), after which the Panel discussion went ahead as
usual! Sajjad Yusuf, (supposedly mentioned in Muhith's book) is still
alive and he is in the United States! Most of the participants at the
Conference/Panel were, at that stage, not fully aware of what was
happening except a few newspaper reports. I don't know what Muhith has
written in his book about his role in that AAS meeting, he was still the
Economic Minister of the Pakistan Embassy in Washington, D.C., as far as
I recollect. An aspersion has been made about my participation in the
1969 anti-Ayub movement. In fact, a former student (not me) mentioned
this in one of his rejoinders! First, I don't want to make any
exaggerated personal claim about the 1969 movements. I feel that the real
heroes of that movement are those who laid down their lives, went to jail
and actually suffered during the anti-Ayub campaign. The Dhaka University
Teachers' Association took lead in that mass upsurge and almost daily
meetings were held, and statements were issued on behalf of the
Association. I was the general secretary of the Dhaka University Teachers
Association, and whatever I did was expected of me at that important
time. Tofail Ahmed invited me to the massive Paltan meeting where I was
ushered to make a speech (I am shy of political speeches!). Next day, my
pictures were in the newspapers, and my colleagues teased me if I had
become a politician! As a matter of record and recollection, Asaduzzaman
was killed not far from my redbrick University residence (now the Science
Annexe), just north of the University play ground, and his brother (my
namesake) was also in that Paltan meeting! Asaduzzaman hailed from my
district, and my younger brother knew him well! I don't want to steal any
of Asad's, and his family's sacrifice and recognition in the 1969
movement!
<part 2 "The Banality of the "Collaboration" bogey!" will be posted
separately>. Dr. M. Rashiduzzaman can be reached at
rashid...@mars.rowan.edu.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
nda...@aol.com
In article <882579738....@dejanews.com>,
rashid...@mars.rowan.edu wrote:
> <part 2 "The Banality of the "Collaboration" bogey!" will be posted
> separately>. Dr. M. Rashiduzzaman can be reached at
> rashid...@mars.rowan.edu.
>
rashid...@mars.rowan.edu wrote:
>
> It's well known that the Indian government was
> reluctant to try the Pakistani killers and rapists. Why? According to
> most observers and analysts in 1972, India was afraid of an international
> tribunal trying the Pakistani soldiers where the legal experts would have
> asked why did India militarily intervene in the internal matter of
> another sovereign country? The legality of the exiled government (in
> Calcutta) inviting India to intervene was not sustainable in the eyes of
> the international law. New Delhi was not willing to confront such
> questions challenging the legality of their military action that midwifed
> the creation of Bangladesh. Under the international law, the Pakistani
> soldiers and some of their "collaborators" surrendered to the Indian
> military, and New Delhi's decision of not trying them prevailed over the
> Bangladeshis. Most countries around the world condemned the Pakistani
> military crackdown, but when India declared war over Bangladesh
> independence, most countries except the Soviet bloc disapproved of it.
> [see a recent book: Craig Baxter, Bangladesh: From Nation to State,
> Westview, 1997]
I do not find much merit in what Rashiduzzaman has referred to as "well
known". I don't think the legality of India's role was the issue.
Firstly, the situation ceased to be an internal affair as soon as
the military junta forced over 10 million Bengalis to seek refuge in
India. It is Pakistan that first invaded India with millions of refugees.
It is Pakistan that on 3rd December launched a massive air attack on
India when Indira Gandhi was away from the capital. I certainly disagree
with Rashiduzzaman's "when India declared war over Bangladesh
independence" statement. India did no such thing. It was Pakistan that
drew the first blood, first with the refugees and then with the massive
air attack of 3rd December. It was at this point (on December 6) that
India extended formal recognition to the Bangladeshi government. General
Niazi surrendered to the joint command of the Indian Army and the Mukti
Bahini on 16th December now celebrated as Bijoy Dibosh.
More than 3 million people were murdered in 1971. But no war crimes trial
took place even though there were specific charges against 195 Pak
military officers. Mujib had to retreat in the face of Bhutto's
blackmail. The Pak Premier declared quite bluntly that he would try the
Bengali officials and military personnel stranded in Pakistan for treason
in case Mujib dared to proceed with the war crimes trial. Bhutto was
bolstered by the fact that both USA and China had seen the independence
of Bangladesh as a victory for the Soviet block in the cold war and were
determined to back Bhutto to the hilt. That was the primary reason why
the 195 Pak officers escaped trials.