1971

1. 1971: A War Remembered Differently Across South Asia

While Pakistan saw 1971 through the lens of loss, similar to how India saw 1947, for Bangladesh, 1971 marked bloodshed, but also the birth of a new nation, a triumph, a victory.

Contrasting perspectives. The year 1971 holds vastly different meanings for the three countries involved. For Bangladesh, it is the Liberation War, a hard-won triumph marking the birth of their nation. For Pakistan, it is the "Fall of Dhaka" or "dismemberment," a humiliating loss and the "second Partition." For India, it is primarily remembered as a decisive military victory over Pakistan, solidifying its regional power.

Beyond bilateral. While Pakistan and India often frame 1971 as another bilateral conflict, Bangladesh emphasizes it as a people's war, a struggle for self-determination against oppression. This difference in framing highlights whose agency is centered in the historical narrative.

Lasting imprints. These divergent memories are not confined to history books; they continue to shape national identities, internal politics, and external relations today. The trauma and triumph are internalized, influencing how each country views itself and its neighbors.

2. State Narratives Shape Memory, Often Silencing Truths

Silences in national histories forget and destroy shared memories inconvenient to the structures enforcing state power.

Selective remembrance. Each state actively promotes a specific version of 1971 that serves its national agenda, often by selectively remembering certain events while silencing others. This process impacts how citizens recall and interpret the past.

Examples of selective memory:

• Pakistan emphasizes violence against non-Bengalis (Biharis, West Pakistanis) to justify military action, often downplaying or denying atrocities by its army.
• Bangladesh highlights the genocide of Bengalis and the liberation struggle, often remaining silent on violence against non-Bengalis or internal dissent against the liberation movement.
• India focuses on its military victory and humanitarian intervention, often minimizing the complex internal factors in East Pakistan or its own strategic interests.

Impact on personal memory. Personal memories are not immune to these state-sponsored narratives. Individuals may unconsciously filter their recollections to align with the dominant discourse, sometimes silencing experiences that contradict the "official truth."

3. Language Became the Spark for Bengali Dissent

For the Bengalis, however, who had fought for the creation of Pakistan to rid themselves of the domination of Hindu zamindars and businessmen, the denial to make Bengali a state language served as a testimony of their continued exploitation.

More than just words. The demand for Bengali to be recognized as a state language alongside Urdu was not merely about linguistic rights; it became a powerful symbol of deeper socio-economic and cultural grievances. Urdu, perceived as interwoven with Islamic culture and West Pakistani identity, was imposed despite Bengali being spoken by the majority.

Early resistance. Dhirendranath Datta's proposal in the Constituent Assembly in 1948 to include Bengali as a state language was met with suspicion and rejection, labeled as an attempt to create a "rift" and linked to "Indian agents." This early dismissal fueled resentment.

Symbol of oppression. Attempts to "Islamisize" Bengali language and culture, seen as too close to Sanskrit and "Hindu," further alienated East Pakistanis. The language movement, culminating in the deaths of students in 1952, solidified Bengali identity and resistance against perceived West Pakistani hegemony.

4. Economic Disparity Fueled Deep Disillusionment

Compared to West Pakistan, East Pakistan was far less developed. There was a stark contrast.

Unequal distribution. Despite East Pakistan generating a significant portion of foreign exchange through jute exports, the revenue was disproportionately invested in the development of West Pakistan. This economic exploitation created a clear disparity between the two wings.

Discrimination in employment. West Pakistanis were often favored over Bengalis for jobs, even in East Pakistan, across various sectors including government services, military, and private industries.

• Only 15% of central government employees were Bengali.
• Only 10% of armed forces personnel were Bengali.
• West Pakistani businesses in the East often hired predominantly West Pakistani staff.

"Stepchildren" feeling. Bengalis felt treated as "stepchildren," with their resources used to build infrastructure in the West while their own cities lagged behind. This economic marginalization, coupled with social and cultural slights, bred deep resentment and a sense of being second-class citizens.

5. The War Inflicted Profound, Lasting Trauma

The war is not just a historical event or a story of gallantry or loss, the war is personal and intimate, the trauma as haunting even forty-eight years later.

Widespread violence. The nine-month war saw immense brutality, including mass killings, rape, torture, and displacement across East Pakistan. Estimates of casualties and rapes vary widely, but the human cost was undeniably devastating.

Personal impact. The violence touched countless lives, turning ordinary civilians into victims, witnesses, or fighters.

• Families lost loved ones to targeted killings (e.g., intellectuals, political activists).
• Women suffered widespread sexual violence, often facing ostracization afterwards despite being labeled "war heroines."
• Children witnessed horrific acts, leaving deep psychological scars.

Memory and trauma. For survivors, the memories remain vivid and painful, often recounted with raw emotion decades later. The trauma is not merely a historical fact but a lived experience that continues to impact individuals and communities.

6. India's Role: More Than Just a Saviour

India has never reconciled with the existence of Pakistan . . . Indian leaders have always believed that Pakistan should not have been created and that [the] Pakistani nation has no right to exist.

Multiple motivations. India's intervention in 1971 was driven by a complex mix of factors, including humanitarian concerns over the refugee crisis, strategic interests in weakening Pakistan, and regional power aspirations.

Strategic goals:

• Managing the influx of nearly 1 crore refugees into India.
• Countering perceived Chinese influence in the region.
• Weakening Pakistan, its historical adversary, after previous wars.
• Asserting India's dominance in South Asia.

"Saviour" vs. "meddler". While Bangladesh often views India as an essential ally and "Mitra Bahinee" (Allied Force) that aided their liberation, Pakistan portrays India as a malicious "aggressor" and "state sponsor of terrorism" bent on dismembering it. This highlights the contested nature of India's role.

7. Pakistan's Narrative: External Conspiracy and Internal Silence

It is stated that: The Indian leadership in general did not agree with the idea of creating a separate homeland for the Muslims. When Pakistan was created to their entire displeasure, they started working on the agenda of dismembering it without delay.

Blaming the enemy. Pakistan's official narrative largely attributes the loss of East Pakistan to an Indian conspiracy, often portraying East Pakistanis as misled or influenced by "Hindu culture" and Indian agents. This externalizes blame and minimizes Pakistan's own role.

Silencing atrocities. The narrative often downplays or omits the military operation (Operation Searchlight) and the widespread atrocities committed by the Pakistan Army, focusing instead on violence against non-Bengalis as justification for military action.

Impact on identity. The defeat in 1971 profoundly impacted Pakistan's national psyche, leading to increased military spending, the pursuit of nuclear weapons, and a greater emphasis on religious identity to unify the remaining nation. The war is remembered as a "humiliating defeat" by India, not a loss to the Bengali people.

8. Bangladesh's Narrative: Genocide and Undisputed Liberation

Bangabandhu declared the Independence of Bangladesh in the early hours of 26 March. The people created enormous resistance to counter the occupation [occupying] Pakistani forces and eventually attained cherished victory.

People's war. Bangladesh's official history centers the narrative on the Bengali people's struggle for liberation, emphasizing the long history of dissent against West Pakistani oppression and culminating in a nine-month war against a brutal military regime.

Genocide claim. The term "genocide" is central to the Bangladeshi narrative, with a widely cited figure of 30 lakh deaths. This emphasizes the scale and severity of the violence and serves as a powerful symbol of suffering and justification for the liberation struggle.

Selective focus. While highlighting the suffering of Bengalis, the official narrative often remains silent on the violence committed against non-Bengalis (Biharis, pro-Pakistan Bengalis) or the complexities and internal divisions within the liberation movement itself. This creates a simplified, unified national story.

9. Resistance to the War Existed Within Pakistan

Us waqt yahan central Punjab mein Mujib ka naam, Bangladesh ka naam, ya Bengalis ke haqooq ka ziqar karna ghadari jaisa tha (at that time, to take Mujib or Bangladesh’s name, or to fight for the rights of Bengalis was seen as treachery).

Voices of dissent. Despite the dominant state narrative and widespread public indifference or support for military action, some Pakistanis actively resisted the war and spoke out against the atrocities in East Pakistan.

Forms of resistance:

• Writers and poets published critical works, facing censorship and imprisonment.
• Activists organized protests and petitions, often facing public hostility.
• Some military personnel refused orders to kill unarmed civilians or helped Bengalis escape.

Moral stand. These individuals, though few in number, took a moral stand against state policies, often at great personal risk. Their stories challenge the monolithic portrayal of West Pakistani sentiment during the war.

10. Marginalized Communities Caught Between Histories

Neither the Pakistani Bengalis nor the Bangladeshi Biharis are deemed loyal enough. They are manifestations of the ongoing war, a war between the state and the communities that simply don’t belong.

Stateless and vulnerable. Communities like the Biharis in Bangladesh and Bengalis in Pakistan remain marginalized, often denied citizenship and basic rights decades after the war. They are caught between national narratives that fail to fully acknowledge their experiences.

Biharis in Bangladesh:

• Often labeled "collaborators" and "stranded Pakistanis."
• Many live in cramped camps, facing discrimination and lack of opportunities.
• Their suffering and violence against them are often excluded from the official Bangladeshi narrative.

Bengalis in Pakistan:

• Many lack national identity cards, limiting access to jobs, education, and services.
• Face suspicion and questions about their loyalty due to their Bengali ethnicity.
• Their reasons for migrating (often economic) are sometimes framed as "love for Pakistan" to assert loyalty.

Ongoing struggle. For these communities, the war is not just a historical event but an ongoing reality that impacts their daily lives, identity, and sense of belonging in countries that are hesitant to fully claim them.

11. Institutionalizing Memory Perpetuates Contested Truths

While textbook history may not be the defining factor in how people think, the histories that the nations make absent or present in schools continue to have an impact.

Textbooks as tools. Textbooks, museums, and memorials are used by states to institutionalize their preferred narratives of 1971, shaping how younger generations understand the past. These tools often perpetuate selective truths and biases.

Examples of institutionalization:

• Bangladeshi textbooks detail Pakistani atrocities and genocide, celebrating liberation heroes.
• Pakistani textbooks emphasize Indian conspiracy and violence against non-Bengalis, minimizing Pakistani military actions.
• Museums in each country curate exhibits that reinforce their national narrative, often using graphic imagery or selective quotes.

Impact on youth. Children grow up with divergent, often conflicting, versions of history, leading to stereotypes and animosity towards the "other." Direct interaction can sometimes challenge these ingrained biases, but the institutional narratives remain powerful.

Last updated: May 17, 2025