Re: Politics over dead bodies-A result of India’s fear of a ‘Brihot Bangladesh’?
A response from Muhammad Asghar
Intrigued by Mr. M. B. I. Munshi’s article, as
published in News from Bangladesh, I am writing this piece in order to elicit
his clarification on some of the points he has mentioned in it. The learned
writer has also highlighted two important points in his scholarly treatise,
which are as follows:
1. India wants to de-stabilize Bangladesh, as it
wants to annex or take over a part of the Indian territory in order to enlarge
its existing size (Brihot Bangladesh).
2. India wants to make Bangladesh part of an “Akhand
Hindustan.” To achieve this goal, India has been creating chaos and confusion
in Bangladesh, so that it can intervene directly, when the right time arrives,
politically, diplomatically, economically as well as militarily in Bangladesh.
India’s allegation that Bangladesh has been supporting the Maoists insurgents
is a link of a net of conspiracy that India has been weaving around Bangladesh
to facilitate the accomplishment of its evil designs on its independent
existence.
I am grateful to Mr. Munshi for pointing out the
above ‘facts,’ as I was not sure of what India was intending to accomplish by
being involved in the internal affairs of Bangladesh. In fact, I have written
an article on this issue titled “What India is supposed to gain by being
anti-Bangladesh?” It is still available on NFB for readers to read. Mr. Munshi
has answered most of my concerns.
Mr. Munshi is an officer of the Supreme Court of
Bangladesh. His position requires him to be always truthful. His responsibility
requires him to represent before the court of law honestly what he knows to be
the truth, and nothing else. Any misrepresentation of a fact is a taboo for him;
if he indulges in it knowingly, he is likely to lose not only his credibility
and honor, but also his license to practice law in the country.
Due to an onerous responsibility placed on his
shoulders, everything Mr. Munshi says or writes about must be correct and
truthful. Where a matter appears to him as being suspect, he is required to
investigate it thoroughly, and only after being satisfied with the fact of the
matter, is he expected to disseminate his findings to others, who may have
interest in them (his findings).
Approaching Mr. Munshi’s assertions from the above
perspectives, I can say without an iota of doubt in my mind that all of what he
has mentioned in his article are truthful and that when challenged, he can
support them with evidence and testimonials. In order to satisfy the
incredulity of those who are not as informed as Mr. Munshi is, I would,
however, like him to clarify the following points, which are the cornerstones
of his article, referred to above:
a. Mr. Munshi claims that the concept of ‘Brihot
Bangladesh’ was invented by India’s RAW.
My question is: Do you have any evidence to prove
your claim? If you have, please publish it on this website for all of your
readers’ knowledge and information.
b. Mr. Munshi claimed that India wants to make Bangladesh
part of an ‘Akhand Hindustan.’ May be it is true, but do you have any evidence
to prove your claim? If you do, please let us read it on NFB as soon as
possible.
c. Mr. Munshi alleged: The Indian elites have been
victimizing and harassing Bangladesh for over 30 years.
My question is: How do you substantiate your claim,
Mr. Munshi? Do you have any documentary evidence to prove your point?
d. Mr. Munshi speculated: India might have tried to
assassinate the top leadership of Awami league probably to justify in their
minds direct interference in Bangladesh.
My questions are:
(i).Sk. Mujib, as Mr. Munshi has confirmed, was a
pro India leader. When India did not intervene in Bangladesh, at the time when
he and most of his family members were brutally killed, can you explain why
Indian might be tempted to intervene now, in the event his daughter had been
killed by the miscreants on August 21, 2004?
(ii).Can you also let us know why India might be
interested to annex Bangladesh, when it already has a handful of problems with
West Bengal, and its political atmosphere?
e. Mr. Munshi quoted Mr. Bhutto, who had stated that
Pakistan had claim on Assam and some districts of India that were adjacent to
now defunct East Pakistan. He had thought that Pakistan had a good claim.
My question for Mr. Munshi is: Do you know why
Pakistan had not made a formal claim on Assam and other districts that were
adjacent to the then East Pakistan ever, especially, when it (Pakistan) fought
two wars with India over Kashmir?
f. Mr. Munshi quoted Sk. Mujib as having written in his book: “Its population and Economics, observed, ‘Because Eastern Pakistan must have sufficient land for its expansion and because Assam has abundant forest and mineral resources, coal and petroleum etc., Eastern Pakistan must include Assam to be financially and economically strong.”
My Questions for Mr. Munshi are: How could have Sk. Mujib been a pro-Indian, when he had ill designs on its territory? Was the RAW not aware of this fact? If it were, then how come India helped him fight for the independence of East Pakistan? Was Pakistan created on the basis of natural resources that existed in India before its partition in 1947? If not, then on what basis both Bhutto and Sk. Mujib could have laid their claim on Assam and other territories of India?
Mr. Munshi explained: This misconception of Bangladesh being an Islamic state was addressed by Mr. Sadeq Khan who has remarked that, ‘Bangladesh incidentally is not an Islamic republic but a people’s republic whose state religion is Islam.’
My questions for Mr. Munshi are: What steps a state must take to make it an Islamic Republic? Does not adoption of Islam as the ‘state religion’ make Bangladesh an Islamic state? Is state supposed to have a religion? Does not the Constitution of Bangladesh begin with “Bismillah”? If it does, then is not Bangladesh an Islamic state?
I hope Mr. Munshi would be kind enough to answer all of my questions in detail. I thank him in anticipation of his cooperation.
August 27, 2004