BMS Broad Questions

 

1.Lahore resualtions

The Lahore Resolution is a crucial event in the history of the Indian subcontinent. On March 23, 1940, during a meeting of the Muslim League in Lahore, an important proposal was adopted. This proposal suggested creating separate and self-governing states in areas where Muslims were in the majority, mainly in the North-West and North-East parts of India. This idea, known as the 'Lahore Proposal', was put forward by Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League, and supported by A. K. Fazlul Haque, Chief Minister of Bengal. It marked the beginning of the demand for a separate country, Pakistan, which was eventually created in 1947.

The proposal also emphasized protecting the rights of religious and cultural minorities in the future constitution of India. It outlined key points:

1. Identifying Separate Regions: The plan proposed finding neighboring areas to be made into distinct regions with adjustments.
2. Creating Independent States: It suggested changing boundaries to establish independent states where Muslims were the majority.
3. Self-Governing States: These states would have the power to make their own decisions.
4. Safeguarding Minority Rights: The proposal aimed to protect minority rights in India and the new Muslim states, including culture and administration.
5. Important Principles: These ideas were to be fundamental in future governance.

In summary, the Lahore Resolution of 1940 proposed separate self-governing states for Muslims in India's North-West and North-East regions. This idea, also called the 'Lahore Proposal', laid the foundation for Pakistan's creation. It also highlighted safeguarding minority rights in the future constitution of India through key principles.

Do you think……………

Yes, the Lahore Resolution evolved into what is known as the Pakistan Resolution. Initially, the Lahore Resolution proposed the creation of several 'independent states' from the Muslim-majority areas of India's north-west and east. The original resolution did not explicitly mention a 'Muslim state' or the term 'Pakistan'. However, after its approval, newspapers, particularly those aligned with the Congress party, labeled it as the 'Pakistan Proposal'.

This shift in terminology led to the Lahore Resolution becoming widely referred to as the 'Pakistan Resolution'. This change generated strong reactions from Congress leaders due to their belief in integral Indian nationalism, which focused on a united India rather than divisions based on religion.

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League, clarified that the term 'Pakistan' was not coined by him or his party. He acknowledged that the term was adopted from newspapers, but he embraced it for the sake of simplicity. Over time, 'Pakistan' became a more recognizable and popular term among the masses. However, it's important to note that the original Lahore Resolution intended the term 'Pakistan' to represent multiple self-governing states, not a single nation.

By 1943, Jinnah began referring to 'Pakistan' as a single state. This transition is evident in his interactions with Gandhi in 1944, where Jinnah explained the idea of a Muslim state with majority areas. He clarified that provinces like Sindh, Baluchistan, North-West Frontier Province, East Bengal, and Assam would become units within Pakistan, not sovereign states.

In summary, the Lahore Resolution's transformation into the Pakistan Resolution was influenced by the adoption of the term 'Pakistan' in newspapers and speeches. Initially proposed as the creation of several independent states, the idea evolved over time. By 1946, the Lahore Resolution was amended to signify a single state. This shift was not based on a structured party decision or a solid moral foundation, yet it energized Muslim nationalism. Consequently, on August 14, 1947, India was divided, and the new state named 'Pakistan' emerged, influenced by the evolution of the Lahore Resolution.

 

2. united front election

The United Front election of 1954 is a crucial chapter in East Bengal's fight for freedom. This election, known as a 'ballot revolution,' was a response to the Muslim League's actions against Bengali identity, language, culture, and history, as well as six years of exploitation under Pakistani rule. The election aimed to counter these issues.

The United Front, a coalition of political parties, formed to challenge the ruling class. Despite winning and forming a government, their efforts were undermined by conspiracies and undemocratic tactics of the Pakistani rulers. The United Front couldn't maintain power due to these challenges.

Although the government eventually failed, the 1954 election was significant. It allowed political parties to gauge public support, impacting Pakistan's national politics. This event showcased East Bengal's struggle for autonomy and its determination to preserve its cultural and historical identity.

The United Front election of 1954 in East Bengal was a historic event, being the first free and general voter election. This election had separate seats reserved for various communities and marked a significant step towards inclusivity. Around 37.19 percent of eligible voters participated. However, poor communication, lack of awareness, and conservative factors limited voter turnout.

The election results were declared between March 15 and April 2, 1954. Out of 237 Muslim seats, the United Front secured 215 seats, the Muslim League won 9 seats, the Khilafat Rabbani Party gained 1 seat, and there were 12 independent winners. Notably, all 9 reserved seats for women were won by the United Front.

Several independent winners later joined the United Front, increasing their strength to 223 members. On the other hand, the Muslim League held 10 seats, and there was 1 seat for the Khilafat Rabbani Party and 3 seats for independents. Based on these results, the United Front achieved an absolute majority in the East Bengal Legislative Assembly.

Interestingly, key Muslim League figures, including the Chief Minister and ministers, faced significant defeats against United Front candidates. Prominent leaders like Nurul Amin, Mafizuddin Ahmad, and others lost by large margins, impacting the leadership landscape. The election highlighted the broad support for the United Front and their vision for East Bengal's future.

The defeat of the Muslim League by the United Front in the 1954 elections can be attributed to several key factors:

1. Formation of the United Front: The United Front, a strong alliance of diverse political parties in East Bengal, united against the ruling Muslim League. This coalition played a pivotal role in the United Front's victory.
2. United Front's Program: The United Front's election manifesto resonated with a wide range of people, from elites to peasants and workers. Promises of making Bengali the national language, ensuring provincial autonomy, and reducing prices gained public support. In contrast, the Muslim League was perceived as opposing autonomy and Bengali language.
3. Leadership: The United Front's success was driven by leaders like A. K. Fazlul Haque, Suhrawardy, and Maulana Bhasani, along with young and student leaders. In contrast, Muslim League leaders lacked popularity and support, particularly at the rural level.
4. Governance System Failure: The Muslim League struggled to formulate an effective governance system for Pakistan during the seven years from 1947 to 1954. This failure to establish a robust system undermined their credibility.
5. Government Inefficiency: The Muslim League government faced corruption, nepotism, and failure in addressing issues like famine, high prices, and law and order. Chief Minister Nurul Amin's defeat underscored their shortcomings.
6. Internal Conflicts: The Muslim League faced internal divisions and the emergence of new opposition parties, weakening their unity and strength.
7. Repressive Policies: The Muslim League's repressive approach towards dissent, labeling criticism as treason, and arresting political activists fueled public anger.
8. Discrimination in East-West Relations: Discrimination against East Bengal in various aspects fueled resentment. The United Front capitalized on this by advocating for provincial autonomy, which the Muslim League avoided.
9. Corruption and Nepotism: The Muslim League's government engaged in rampant corruption and nepotism, causing discontent among the public.
10. Lack of Mass Communication: The Muslim League lacked effective communication with the masses, contributing to their defeat.

The Muslim League's defeat and the United Front's success can be summarized by factors such as the United Front's strong alliance, a resonant program, effective leadership, the failure of the Muslim League's governance and policies, internal conflicts, repressive measures, discrimination, corruption, and poor communication.

3.Six point

The Six-Point Program was a set of important demands put forward by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman on February 12, 1966. These demands were about how the government in Bangladesh should work and what powers different parts of the country should have.

Point No. 1: The government should be like a team, and it should have two main parts: federal and parliamentary. This means that there would be a central government and also smaller governments in different parts of the country. People should be able to directly vote for the people they want in these governments, and everyone who can vote should be allowed to do so. The number of people in the central government should be decided based on how many people live in each area.

Point No. 2: The main central government should only handle certain things like protecting the country and making decisions about other countries. Other things like money and currency should be handled in a different way.

Point No. 3: There should be two separate types of money in the different parts of the country, or maybe just one type of money, but there has to be a plan to make sure that money doesn't move too much from one place to another. This is important to keep the money balanced between the different parts of the country.

Point No. 4: Each smaller government in different parts of the country should be in charge of deciding about money and taxes for their area. The central government should get enough money for protecting the country and dealing with other countries. This way, each part of the country can control its own money, and the central government gets what it needs too.

Point No. 5: There should be special rules about how each part of the country can use the money they get from trade and other countries. The central government can use some money, but each smaller government should have the power to use their money in a certain way.

Point No. 6: Each smaller government should be allowed to have a special group of people who can help with protecting the country. This group can help make sure the country is safe and secure.

So, the Six-Point Program had these six important demands that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman wanted to see in the way the government worked in Bangladesh. These demands were about how power, money, and decisions should be shared between the central government and the smaller governments in different parts of the country.

 

 Why is called charter of freedom of Bangladesh……

 

 

4.Mass Movement

The mass movement of 1969 and the fall of Ayub Khan were significant events in the history of Bangladesh, driven by several causes:

1. Autonomy Denied: The Pakistani government's reluctance to grant autonomy ignited discontent. Earlier, demands for regional autonomy and recognition of Bengali as a state language were neglected, sparking protests and resistance.
2. Language Movement: The movement against the imposition of Urdu as the sole state language in 1952 marked the beginning of Bengali nationalism. The successful language movement later contributed to the broader anti-Ayub movement.
3. Election Victory and Defeat: The United Front's victory in the 1954 elections and subsequent fall due to central government interference increased Bengali nationalist sentiment.
4. Constitutional Neglect: The 1956 constitution neglected regional governance, but Ayub Khan's martial law in 1962 suppressed political activities and opposition.
5. Martial Law and Repression: Ayub Khan's martial law and repressive policies, as well as the arrest of Hossain Shaheed Suhrawardy, sparked anti-Ayub movements in 1962.
6. 1962 Constitution and Student Agitation: The 1962 constitution and police actions led to student agitations and opposition against Ayub Khan's rule.
7. Emergence of Leaders: After Suhrawardy's death, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman emerged as a leader, highlighting the disparity between East and West Pakistan and Ayub Khan's dictatorship.
8. Indo-Pak War of 1965: Bengal's perceived neglect in the war and Sheikh Mujib's portrayal of regional disparity fueled demands for autonomy.
9. Six-Point Movement: In 1966, Sheikh Mujib raised the six-point demand for East Bengal's autonomy, gaining support and sparking an anti-Ayub movement.
10. Agartala Conspiracy Case: The government's false case against Sheikh Mujib and others intensified protests and created unity against Ayub's regime.
11. Anti-Government Agitation: The Agartala case, combined with demands for provincial autonomy, ignited an anti-Ayub movement in East Pakistan.
12. Popular Uprising: The anti-Ayub movement of 1968 turned into a widespread uprising in early 1969, leading to Ayub Khan's overthrow.

These factors, including autonomy denial, language movement, election dynamics, repression, leadership emergence, and specific incidents like the Agartala case, collectively fueled the mass movement that ultimately resulted in Ayub Khan's downfall and played a pivotal role in Bangladesh's history.

 

The popular uprising of 1969 during Ayub Khan's rule holds immense significance due to several transformative outcomes:

1. Transformation of Movement: The movement began as a general protest against government oppression but evolved into a spontaneous, widespread uprising that spread across the country, leading to a major shift in its character.
2. Emergence of Consciousness: The movement ignited student resistance against the dictatorial government and fueled the end of the Durbar Bang movement. It led to the adoption of the 11-point and 6-point demands and triggered a massive road revolution.
3. Political Changes: The movement compelled the ruling government to release all political prisoners, including Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and marked the fall of Ayub Khan from power.
4. Demands for Representation: The movement contributed to the acceptance of representative elections based on voting rights, promoting the idea of a parliamentary system of government.
5. Class Consciousness and Struggle: It spurred class consciousness in both rural and urban areas, partially developing class struggle dynamics.
6. Nationalism and Identity: The movement fulfilled the sense of nationalism for Bengalis as an independent nation, which had its roots in the language movement of 1948.
7. Desire for Independence: It nurtured the desire for a separate state in East Bengal, leading to the proposal for an independent socialist Bangladesh.
8. Popularization of Ideals: The movement popularized ideologies like socialism and the Awami League's ideals, particularly through Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's leadership.
9. Symbol of National Consciousness: The uprising of 1969 became a symbol of national consciousness and is commemorated as a public holiday, reflecting its enduring importance.
10. Impact on Future Elections: The movement directly influenced the Awami League's victory in the 1970 elections. It strengthened Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's influence and commitment to protecting Bengali interests and achieving independence.
11. Connection to 1971 Liberation Movement: The spirit of this movement laid the groundwork for the Bengali nation's participation in the 1971 independence movement, which led to the creation of an independent sovereign Bangladesh.

In summary, the popular uprising of 1969 acted as a catalyst for significant political, social, and national changes. Its impact on government policies, leadership influence, national consciousness, and eventual contributions to the formation of an independent Bangladesh makes it a pivotal event in the history of East Bengal and Pakistan.

 

 

5. 1970 election

 

The background of the 1970 elections reveals a complex political scenario in Pakistan, particularly East Bengal:

1. Lahore Resolution and Autonomy:
• The Lahore Resolution promised autonomy but West Pakistani rulers treated East Bengal as a colony.
• Despite the partition, the constitution wasn't drafted by elected representatives until 1956.
2. Elections of 1954:
• Elections held in East Bengal with universal suffrage and independent constituencies.
• The United Front won a majority, while the ruling Muslim League faced defeat.
• The United Front formed a cabinet, which was later dissolved by the Governor General.
3. First Constitution of Pakistan (1956):
• Recognized Eastern units' autonomy but concentrated powers at the Centre.
• Before full implementation, General Ayub Khan seized power in 1958, imposing military rule and banning political activities.
4. Ayub Khan's Regime:
• Ayub Khan's autocratic rule continued, and he held elections in 1960, 1962, and 1964, seemingly without opposition.
• In 1966, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman presented the "six points" demanding Bengali rights and autonomy.
• The "Agartala Conspiracy Case" against Sheikh Mujib angered East Bengalis, leading to the Durbar movement of 1968-69.
5. End of Ayub Khan's Rule:
• Ayub Khan faced mass protests and stepped down on March 25, 1969, handing power to General Yahya Khan.
• The Agartala case was withdrawn, and political restrictions were lifted on January 1, 1970.
6. Election Dates and Cyclone Impact:
• National Assembly and Provincial Council elections set for December 7.
• Severe cyclones and floods in East Bengal postponed elections in some areas to January 17, 1971.

In summary, the lead-up to the 1970 elections in Pakistan was marked by political changes, autocratic rule, demands for autonomy, and a significant cyclone event that affected the timing of the elections, especially in East Bengal.

 

 

result

In the 1970 elections, the Awami League achieved a significant victory by securing 160 out of 162 seats in the National Assembly. The remaining two seats went to PDP candidates. Meanwhile, PPP gained 83 seats in West Pakistan. Overall, Awami League won a total of 167 seats, including reserved women's seats, out of 313 in the National Assembly, with PPP as the runner-up with 88 seats. Notably, Awami League dominated in East Pakistan, securing 298 out of 310 seats in the Provincial Council. A remarkable aspect of these results was the clear regional divide, as Awami League triumphed in the East while PPP failed to secure any seats there. This outcome highlighted the distinct identity of the Bengali nation and challenged Western influence over the region.

 

Do you…………

Absolutely, the 1970 election results were indeed a significant factor that paved the way for the Liberation War of Bangladesh. The election's outcomes carried vital implications. Firstly, the victory of Bengali separatism in the election highlighted the strong demand for autonomy and individuality among Bengalis. Additionally, the regional dominance of parties like Awami League and PPP exposed the unjust rule of West Pakistan over East Pakistan.

The election also played a key role in strengthening Bengali nationalism, which had been evolving through earlier movements. The clear majority gained by Awami League under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman emphasized his significance and the party's influence. However, the subsequent conspiracy to undermine the legitimate power of the winning party sparked widespread protests, escalating tensions in the region.

This unrest ultimately led to the declaration of independence on March 26, 1971, when Yahya Khan's actions triggered a response from Bengalis. The Liberation War commenced, and through nine months of struggle, Bangladesh emerged as an independent and sovereign nation on December 16, 1971.

Therefore, it's evident that the 1970 election results, along with the subsequent events, significantly contributed to the inspiration and initiation of the Liberation War, ultimately leading to the birth of an independent Bangladesh.

 

6.Role of great power

 

The outside world played a crucial role in Bangladesh's liberation war. Notably, powerful countries like the United States and the Soviet Union, along with emerging nations like India and China, had significant involvement. India and the Soviet Union were supportive of our liberation war, providing direct help. In contrast, the United States and China were on the opposing side.

 

 

USA

The United States' role in Bangladesh's liberation war was marked by complexity and controversy. While the US government officially supported Pakistan, there was a considerable divide within American society, including Congress members, senators, intellectuals, and media outlets, who expressed sympathy and support for Bangladesh's struggle for independence. This contrasted with the Nixon administration's policies, as President Nixon, Secretary of State Rogers, and National Security Advisor Kissinger provided substantial moral, political, economic, and military backing to Pakistan throughout the nine-month conflict.

The US policy towards the war underwent four distinct phases. Initially, from March to July, the US maintained a position of strategic neutrality, considering the Bangladesh situation an "internal matter" of Pakistan. However, this stance was challenged by figures like Ambassador Kenneth Keating, who deemed it a matter of global concern. By May, Washington suspended arms supplies and financial aid to Pakistan, but behind-the-scenes arms contracts continued.

The second phase, from July to August, saw intensified US efforts to counterbalance Soviet influence by engaging with China and supporting Pakistan. The Nixon administration aimed for a united Pakistan under a political solution, trying to avoid military conflict. However, these attempts ultimately failed.

During the third phase, spanning September to December, the Nixon administration adopted a more pro-Pakistan stance. They sought a reconciliation between Pakistan and Bengali leaders like Khandkar Mushtaq Ahmed, while pressuring India and Bangladesh to resolve the issue within the context of a united Pakistan.

In the fourth phase, starting in December 1971, as the Indo-Pak war escalated, the US adopted a strong anti-India, pro-Pakistan policy. President Nixon ordered Henry Kissinger to provide diplomatic and moral support to Pakistan, a policy known as the "Tilt Policy." The US even dispatched a naval task force to the Bay of Bengal to pressure India. Although there were instances of American citizens, intellectuals, and media outlets supporting Bangladesh, the official stance remained in favor of Pakistan.

Despite the US government's stance, the broader American society exhibited sympathy for Bangladesh's liberation. Many American individuals, artists, writers, intellectuals, and organizations supported the cause. Numerous US politicians, including Senator Edward Kennedy, expressed criticism of the administration's policy. Overall, while there was a divergence between official US government policy and private-level sentiments, geopolitical considerations and other factors influenced the US role in the liberation war.

Russia

 

The Soviet Union played a significant role in the liberation war of Bangladesh, and its involvement can be understood in three phases.

In the first phase, from March to June, the Soviet Union's approach was cautious. They emphasized finding a peaceful solution for the people of East Bengal, urging Pakistan to halt the violence and seek resolution. This phase showed the Soviet Union's initial stance of supporting a peaceful settlement.

Moving to the second phase, spanning July to November, a notable shift occurred. After Henry Kissinger's visit to China and the subsequent Russo-Indian alliance agreement in August, the Soviet Union aligned more closely with India. This shift weakened Pakistan's position morally. The Soviet Union transitioned from simply condemning the atrocities in Bangladesh to actively supporting India's viewpoint.

In the last phase, from December until Bangladesh's independence, the Soviet Union's position solidified. They directly accused Pakistan of causing the war and pledged not to ignore threats to their borders and interests. While providing diplomatic and moral support to India, the Soviet Union strategically delayed cease-fire efforts to allow Indian forces to secure victory. Their veto in the United Nations aimed to prevent a cease-fire until Dhaka was captured. After Pakistan's surrender, the Soviet Union no longer opposed cease-fire resolutions, ultimately contributing to the end of the conflict.

Overall, the Soviet Union's role shifted from cautious diplomacy to proactively supporting the liberation movement. Their evolving stance showcased their opposition to the prolonged violence and their support for Bangladesh's just cause.

 

INDIA

India played a vital and multi-faceted role in the liberation war of Bangladesh, divided into three phases.

In the first phase (April to July), India opened its borders and allowed Bangladeshi refugees to seek shelter. They facilitated political activities for the Bangladeshi government-in-exile and trained Bengali youth to become freedom fighters. India also aided in setting up a radio station and provided light weapons. The rejection of US-mediated efforts by Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi displayed India's determination to support the liberation cause on its terms.

Moving to the second phase (August to November), India responded more actively as Pakistani military bases were targeted. An alignment with the Soviet Union was established, and India's policy shifted as the Russo-Indian alliance agreement was signed. India's commitment solidified when they recognized Bangladesh and engaged in land, sea, and air warfare, leading to victory.

In the third phase (December 3-16), India's military intervention intensified. They recognized Bangladesh, launched a comprehensive military campaign, and played a crucial role in the joint effort to reach Dhaka and secure victory.

Throughout these phases, India's private sector, political parties, intellectuals, and the public expressed support and sympathy for the liberation war. Various organizations provided aid, shelter, and assistance to refugees. India spent significant resources on refugees' welfare, training, logistics, and arms, highlighting their dedication. The sacrifices of Indian officers and soldiers and their unwavering compassion showcased India's substantial role from the beginning to the end of the liberation war.