A brief look into history

The afternoon of 18th December 2013, when “Ganajagaran Mancha” was marching towards the Pakistan High Commission in Bangladesh, a friend and I were watching it live on a screen over lunch, at a place within close proximity and safely tucked in the diplomatic belt. My friend popped a very simple question that led me to tread through a myriad of un-simple steps, tracing back to the beginning of Bangladesh.

The question was simply this: if the birth of Bangladesh indeed was a bloody one, and one which had to be claimed with all our might, life and fight, then how is that there still remains a Pakistani embassy in Bangladesh – how is that we have such a simple/uncomplicated diplomatic terms with this country that once stood to annihilate us? The lack of complication in this scenario is as irksome and repetitive to me, as it must be for you.

See a question of this nature could only come from a person who has not lived here long enough, not lived to witness the different phases that this country’ history had undergone in the last 42 years, and it certainly was the case.

When Bangladesh first embarked upon its lone journey after its secession from Pakistan, it was hardly popular. Recognition came quickly from the Soviet bloc communist countries, but their more ‘western’ counterparts like the USA were steadfastly opposed to the notion. Among them, Australia and New Zealand were the first to recognise Bangladesh as a sovereign state. The Islamic world and African countries, on the other hand, took their time, leaving Saudi Arabia, Libya and China in denial even after close to three and a half years of independence.

Shortly after the emergence of Bangladesh, the government demonstrated a left-leaning economic policy by nationalising all industries and in 1972 the concept of socialism was manifested quite visibly in the Constitution of Bangladesh. The first Prime Minister of Bangladesh tajuddin ahmed refused to accept aid from any country that had opposed our liberation struggle, in effect been against its birth as a free nation. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman returned after his imprisonment in Pakistan to assume the reins of the government with the aspiration for Bangladesh to become the “Switzerland of the East”.

In the first three and a half years of its independence, under Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s reign, Bangladesh had managed to win over the rest of the world, consequently becoming members of the United Nations and most other major worldwide organisations such as the Commonwealth and even the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC). USA that had initially viewed Bangladesh with contempt, eventually joined forces with Japan, the United Kingdom and other developed nations to aid the economic crisis persisting then.

And then 1975 happened.

There had never been any contention over the clear popularity of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as a leader but to what extent he managed to live up to the expectations remained a moot point. Before 1975, the Awami League was the only major political party to reckon with and Mujib as the one and only leader unanimously proclaimed! The experience and appeal of the members of this party was unparalleled and the new Bangladesh government was laden with the mammoth of a responsibility to reconstruct the economy and society alike. It was during 1974 that the situation was getting out-of-hand and the government resorted to stricter measures over the growing deterioration of the economy. This led to the formation of the Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League (BAKSAL): a one-party system. With that, communism seeped through the walls, becoming susceptible to a new law and order, with a ban on all media except government publications and introduction of the Jatiyo Rakkhi Bahini(National Vanguards).

The rest, as the cliché goes, is history. As is evident in most archived items online (sadly cannot reference any history book regarding this incident), five majors from the Bangladesh Army conspired a coup to take over Mujib’s presidency, and on an early morning of 15^th of August 1975, wiped off not only Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, but his entire family at the residence, including a ten year-old son, couple of the helps, and a nephew and his pregnant wife in another location simultaneously. The only survivors were his daughters Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Rehana, in West Germany at the time.

The sole reasons I took this liberty to walk down the memory lane is to ensure I have my own personal bearings right, before I get back to my friend with a delayed response; and I am quite confident I am not alone in this. Most of us born in the 80s face similar issues when it comes to explaining our history and it is because each of us, belonging to a different generation, even ten years apart, face a challenge when it comes to explaining certain issues pertaining to this country’s set of beliefs, especially with secularism, nationalism and the essence of belonging. When specifics of our history are questioned, we tend to become dismissive or evasive. Our history before and after 1975 sings conflicting tunes resulting in at least three generations of baffled identities.

It is also interesting to note that a lot of my counterparts from these generations are not even aware of the events that took place after the coup. The fact that Khondokar Mustaq Ahmed, an Awami League cabinet Minister under the Mujib regime, took over the presidency (with rumours of linkage between him and the CIA in many publications thereafter), only to be overthrown by another coup led by Major General Khaled Mosharraf on the 3rd November 1975, who was killed in a counter coup only four days later, finally paving way for Major General Ziaur Rahman to assume power. The Zia government adopted policies to establish relationships with the Muslim countries on the basis of Islamic solidarity, taking a step back from secularism, and channelled its energy to appeal to the majority of the population and foster cordial relationships with the USA.

It is okay, I believe to have certain parts of history to be subjected to debate (I mean look at how the nature of holocaust or other universally known truths are still debated among different groups), as is the case with most other countries in the world and we are no extraordinary exception. However, I wonder if there should not be a unifying platform that binds us every Bangladeshi together and at least a basic sketch of history that we all can take pride in.

While the generations in Bangladesh grew up reading excerpts taken from different incidents, which left quite a bit of details to imagination, involving its political history, interestingly the same group of children in Pakistan were left in the dark in regards to the Pakistani army and government’s role in an almost elimination of the then East Pakistan. Thus, in order for me to revert back to the innocent question posed by my friend, I have to frisk my own memory to find answers. Why our sour diplomatic relations with Pakistan turned cordial within less than five years of wounds bayoneted into our hearts, and why Pakistan found the execution of traitors for the conception of Bangladesh unfair, are questions I do not have a straight answer to. I can only see Pakistan as a nation or race defined by the style of their cricket players – either floundering with sixes or hat trick wickets or scoring absolutely nothing – erratic and volatile. This Indian subcontinent, just like its movies, has witnessed the most dramatic twists and turns in history. There is a strained voice though, in the midst of all this chaos, telling me to look at where we are in 42 years with a nil startup, and where Pakistan is after 42 years of trying to rob us off everything. The little voice tells me — we must be doing something right.