THE present is so gripping for us that we prefer to put our past on the back burner. But what happened in East Pakistan in 1970-71 remains fresh in the memories of the 50-plus generations. Most of them were directly or indirectly affected.
Hence in any discourse on Bangladesh in any context, attention eventually focuses on the happenings of those fateful years, which ended in the break-up of the country. That is how it turned out to be at the symposium on the political crisis in Bangladesh that was organised recently by the Pakistan Institute of International Affairs, Karachi. Initially, the speakers focused on the current developments in that country — the cause of the unrest and the challenges the interim government faces. We were informed about the similarities, and more the dissimilarities, in the political cultures of Pakistan and its erstwhile eastern wing.
What was striking, and quite understandably so, was the engagement of the audience with Bangladesh’s past, which happens to be our history as well. The fact is that if you want to get a deeper insight into that country, you have to revisit the political controversies of 1947-1971 from the Bengalis’ perspective.
It was hardly surprising when a woman in the audience raised the issue of the Pakistan government apologising to the people of Bangladesh for the past wrongs. Dr Masuma Hasan, who was presiding, explained that in his visit to Dhaka in 2002, General Pervez Musharraf had written in the visitors’ book at the National Martyrs Memorial that the “excesses committed during the unfortunate period are regrettable”. He also appealed to people to bury the past in a spirit of magnanimity.
In any discourse on Bangladesh, attention focuses on the happenings of 1970-71.
I will not analyse the “I am sorry” syndrome here in the context of Bangladesh as the issue has been debated interminably. Besides, I am not certain if a candid analysis of its pros and cons in the current circumstances would even be appreciated by the powers that be.
Suffice it to say that the importance of etiquette and other social niceties in diplomatic and political dealings should always be considered on account of the advantages they offer in many situations. Thus, Ambassador Rafiuzzaman Siddiqi, who was posted as Pakistan’s high commissioner in Dhaka in 2016 and was one of the speakers at the PIIA event, described his personal experience of the impact of such gestures. In August 2017 he decided to lay a wreath at Mujibur Rahman’s memorial in Dhanmondi on the anniversary of his death in a coup that had occurred 42 years earlier. “My gesture was widely welcomed by the Bangladeshis, especially the Awami League leadership,” Mr Siddiqi recalled.
Here I would like to write about the practice of offering a formal apology in public life. It is unfortunate that we are not generous in the use of polite words such as ‘thank you’ and ‘sorry’ even in our private conversations. Our TV talk shows and the inscriptions on social media confirm my observation. Hence, I cannot say how many would have heard about the governments of Canada, Australia and New Zealand offering public apologies to the indigenous people living in their countries. The territories that ultimately became the above-named Dominions of the Commonwealth were not vacant land waiting to be occupied by outsiders. Many tribal groups were already living there when the foreigners arrived and disrupted the culture and the way of life of their hosts. This was a creeping colonisation of sorts.
The settlers displaced and exploited the indigenous owners of these lands and robbed them of their treasures and resources. The indigenous people suffered many indig-nities at the hands of their occupiers. The most brutal and inhuman measure inflicted on the locals by the outsiders was that of forcibly taking away the children from their parents on the pretext of ‘civilising’ them and teaching them the English language in order to socially assimilate them. With education and democratisation came the realisation that this was a gross violation of human rights; justice and reconciliation called for an apology and compensation.
By the 1990s, the resentment of the indigenous people was quite evident and the need for an apology was felt if the bitterness of the past had to be wiped out. After negotiations between the two sides, the terms of the apology and the amount of financial compensation to be paid were agreed upon.
Since the last few years the three governments have been holding ceremonies to apologise to different groups. Some may still be nursing grudges, but the impression we have is that the two sides are no longer at daggers drawn. If any disputes arise, the legal mechanism is available for the resolution of a dispute.
Published in Dawn, September 6th, 2024
Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.