The negotiations on Hasina’s return should be done separately, and we should assure her that we are not forcing her to return. However, we must stop her press conferences.
India’s strategic conundrum vis-à-vis then East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, began with Bengal’s first partition by Curzon in 1905. In reality, the tragedy unfolded much earlier with the “sale of Bengal” to the English with Clive’s farcical victory in Plassey in 1757. Did Islam make a violent entrance into Bengal? This is an emotive issue. Was there a syncretic culture in Bengal from ancient times? Were the two distinct religious communities living in harmony, bound by a common culture, language, cuisine and racial origin? The census of 1872, followed by the first modern Census of India in 1901, confirmed that Bengal’s Muslim population was concentrated in the fertile plains, called “rice swamps”, of East Bengal. Bengali Muslims concentrated in the rural areas of East Bengal were not outsiders but were converts from lowest caste Hindus. Nor was the Bengali Muslim convert a monolithic Muslim social or cultural entity.
Bengali Muslim identity evolved depending on their social, ethnic and caste origin. The common Bengali cultural and social norms remained and would deeply influence future history. The deep divisions within Bengali Muslim society represented the cleavages inherent in their social and caste origin. There were the new “Muslim Brahmins”, the “Ashraf” or “Sharif”, the nobility descended from foreigners and upper-caste Hindu converts. The upperclass Ashraf also rejected the local language, Bengali, in preference to Urdu. Their rejection reflected their social and caste bias towards the lower-class Bengali Muslim, whose preference was for Bengali. The new Muslim lower castes were called the “Ajlaf”, “Atrap”. In Bengal, in the late nineteenth century, many were influenced by the charismatic teachings of Swami Vivekananda who presented Vedantic Hinduism as a universal faith and the synthesis of all religions. Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay played a catalytic role in the development of Hindu nationalism.
His evocative novel “Anandamath” created a national identity for Indians as well as the notion of a Motherland associated with nationhood. “Vande Mataram,” which translates into “I revere thee, Mother,” became the icon of the burgeoning national movement. The Hindu reformist movement did not contribute to the consolidation of a Hindu communal identity. It developed universal tolerance and understanding and united Indians of any religion to rediscover their national pride and confidence and fight colonialism. It is unfortunate that the reformist movement in Islam did contribute to a consolidation of a distinct religious Islamic identity, communalism and ultimately to the phenomenon of separatism. The idea of nationhood and nationalism in a modern sense, originated during this period in late-colonial Bengal. It had deep roots in Bengal’s pre-colonial history. This period saw the rise of a militant social reform movement that affected Hinduism and led to the evolution of a Hindu nationalist identity. The Bengali Muslim lacked a large, dynamic and upwardly mobile middle class, who would embrace English education and adapt Western notions of modern nationalism and freedom to Bengal. Consequently, they felt marginalized and excluded.
It was language rather than religion which was the key to understanding the issue of identity in Bengal. Bengalis, whether Hindu or Muslim, were defined by their culture rather than their religion. “Syncretistic” Islam practised by the masses in Bengal in their own language was fundamentally different to doctrinal Islam practised by the elite, in Arabic, Persian and Urdu. The efforts of erstwhile West Pakistan’s Punjabidominated Muslim dictators to fundamentally alter this folk culture and to eliminate the Bengali language in East Pakistan led to the language agitation, the growth of the Awami League and the spectacular rise of Mujibur Rahman, the father of Bangladesh. The notion of India being historically divided since the advent of Islam into two nations, the Hindu and the Muslim, suited the colonialist who wished to deny nationhood to Indians on these grounds. It also suited the communal Muslim argument that, India having been ruled by Muslim rulers from the tenth century onwards had evolved into two nations, divided by religion.
The partition of 1905 was an effort to destroy Bengal’s syncretic culture and polarize Muslims. Polarization was so complete that even when the Partition was revoked in 1911, the deep shock of the Bengali Muslims found expression, not in any anti-British fury, but in antipathy directed more towards the Hindu community in Bengal. Who planted the fatal seed of communalism leading to a permanent divide between the Bengali Hindu and Muslim? Communalism is a phenomenon directly derived from the imperatives of colonial rule. It had to happen. Bengal was the hapless victim. The colonial government decided that Bengal, which was at the forefront of the war against Japan, should fund the military construction works and feed the troops of the British Indian army. The most devastating manifestation of this cynical policy was the Great Bengal Famine of 1943-44, which killed between 3.5 and 3.8 million people in Bengal.
A World War II holocaust, it sharply impacted the political events that would follow. The dynamics of colonialism, famine in Bengal and partition politics represents an ugly blot on the image of the colonial power. Its most ugly manifestation, symbolic of the racist and contemptuous approach of the British elite towards Bengalis, will forever be represented by Winston Churchill’s remarks: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits.” It was unfortunate that the leader of the Muslim League in Bengal, who became its chief minister, was Suhrawardy, the notorious former minister for food and civil supplies during the Great Bengal Famine in 1943, which resulted in 2 million Bengalis dying of starvation.
The “Great Kolkata Killings” was due to Suhrawardy’s intention to prepare Muslim public opinion for the creation of a Muslim Bengal, with Calcutta as its capital.
Suhrawardy is regarded as a national hero in Bangladesh. Of greater interest was Suhrawardy’s admission in his memoirs that on the eve of Partition, there were four times more Hindus in East Bengal than Muslims in Calcutta.
The moot point was that the liberation struggle in former East Pakistan from 1947 onwards was based on language, culture and identity, and not religion. It was antithetical to the prePartition movement led by the All India Muslim League for division of territory based on majority religious population.
The linguistic and cultural identity debate that emerged in East Bengal was a rejection and a negation of communalism and the communal divisive ideology of Jinnah’s twonation theory. The creation of Bangladesh itself repudiates the so-called communal religion based justification of Partition.
History is replete with ironies. One of the greatest historical ironies is that the creation of Pakistan on the basis of religion was swiftly undone in the East, not due to religion but due to language. The efforts of the Urdu speaking minority of West Pakistan (25 million out of 69 million) to impose Urdu as the official language and eradicate Bengali from the culture and civilizational fabric of the 44 million Bengali Muslims unleashed social and political unrest soon after the creation of this theocratic state.
The history of East Pakistan post its creation with a mass language movement, repression by the West Pakistan “Junta”, refusal by Pakistan to accept the results of a free and fair election that would have installed Mujibur Rahman as Prime Minister of all of Pakistan and the genocide of 1 million Bangladeshi Muslims and minority Hindus in 1971 is a narrative of a violent struggle for selfdetermination.
What happens now? With the overthrow of Sheikh Hasina, history and politics seem to have been reversed. At present, with Awami League out of the picture, BNP seems a better option for India than Jamaat.
The negotiations on Hasina’s return should be done separately, and we should assure her that we are not forcing her to return. However, we must stop her press conferences. While she is in India, we should have the same policy for Sheikh Hasina which we have for the Dalai Lama.
We must also make it clear to the Bangladesh PM that playing fast and loose with us in this manner, through articles etc to convey politically unacceptable messages will only deepen economic woes. We are willing to be pragmatic, provided the Bangladesh PM treats us with the respect we deserve as the country that liberated Bangladesh and stood by it during its darkest hours.
We need to communicate, as we must have done, that they need us much more than we need them. If economic conditions worsen, he could face a military coup, like his own father had orchestrated.
Finally, as someone whose ancestors hail from the lush green fields of East Bengal, there is a totally different relationship on one hand between Bengali Muslims and Hindus on one hand and Bengali Muslims and Pakistani Muslims and Arabs on the other.
This has not changed and will not change. Bengali Muslims are regarded as second class Muslims for them. Bengali Muslims also dislike the fair skinned upper caste Bengali Hindus who stayed back. This too will never change. It explains their ambivalence to their minorities.
Is there a way forward? Can there ever be closure? It looks difficult. But pragmatic options remain.
One could consider a negotiated return of Sheikh Hasina, a clear understanding with Bangladesh PM of the red lines he cannot cross with India and vigil on our Eastern frontiers so that illegal immigrants cannot cross. This should be accompanied by discreet support to the Awami League.
It has been said that a nation cannot change its history or geography. I would add that it cannot change its DNA. No matter what happens, Bengali DNA will reassert itself. That DNA based on language and culture, where the nation’s anthem is composed by Tagore and Kali worship continues through Nazrul’s “Shyama Sangeet”, which has never been questioned.
DNA is DNA. I rest my case here.
*Bhaswati Mukherjee is a retired Ambassador of India.
