1971 Bangladesh Atrocities - International Reactions

International Reactions

Time reported a high U.S. official as saying "It is the most incredible, calculated thing since the days of the Nazis in Poland." Genocide is the term that is used to describe the event in almost every major publication and newspaper in Bangladesh, and is defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group"

A 1972 report by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) noted that both sides in the conflict accused each other of perpetrating genocide. The report observed that it may be difficult to substantiate claims that 'whole of the military action and repressive measures taken by the Pakistan army and their auxiliary forces constituted genocide' intended to destroy the Bengali people in whole or in part by the Pakistan army, and that 'preventing a nation from attaining political autonomy does not constitute genocide: the intention must be to destroy in whole or in part the people as such'. The difficulty of proving intent was considered to be further complicated by the fact that three specific sections of the Bengali people were targeted in killings by the Pakistan army and their collaborators: members of the Awami League, students, and East Pakistan citizens of Hindu religion. The report observed, however, that there are is strong prima facie case that there were particular acts of genocide committed, especially towards the end of the war, where Bengalis were targeted indiscriminately. Similarly, it was felt that there is a strong prima facie face that crimes of genocide were committed against the Hindu population of East Pakistan.

As regards the massacres of non-Bengalis by Bengalis during and after the Liberation War, the ICJ report argued that it is improbable that 'spontaneous and frenzied mob violence against a particular section of the community from whom the mob senses danger and hostility is to be regarded as possessing the necessary element of conscious intent to constitute the crime of genocide', but that, if the dolus specialis were to be proved in particular cases, this would have constituted acts of genocide against non-Bengalis.

Many international publications on genocide and human rights abuses classify the atrocities of 1971 as an act of genocide by West Pakistan.

After the minimum 20 countries became parties to the Genocide Convention, it came into force as international law on 12 January 1951. At that time however, only two of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council were parties to the treaty, and it was not until after the last of the last five permanent members ratified the treaty in 1988, and the Cold War came to an end, that the international law on the crime of genocide began to be enforced. As such, the allegation that genocide took place during the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971 was never investigated by an international tribunal set up under the auspices of the United Nations.

Although both Pakistan and its primary ally the USA have denied genocide allegations, the word ‘genocide’ was and is used frequently amongst observers and scholars of the events that transpired during the 1971 war. It is also used in some publications outside the subcontinent; for example, The Guinness Book of Records lists the Bengali atrocities as one of the top 5 genocides in the 20th century.

On 16 December 2002, the George Washington University’s National Security Archives published a collection of declassified documents, mostly consisting of communications between US officials working in embassies and USIS centers in Dhaka and in India, and officials in Washington DC. These documents show that US officials working in diplomatic institutions within Bangladesh used the terms ‘selective genocide’ and ‘genocide’ (Blood telegram) to describe events they had knowledge of at the time. They also show that President Nixon, advised by Henry Kissinger, decided to downplay this secret internal advice, because he wanted to protect the interests of Pakistan as he was apprehensive of India's friendship with the USSR, and he was seeking a closer relationship with China, who supported Pakistan.

In his book The Trial of Henry Kissinger, Christopher Hitchens elaborates on what he saw as the efforts of Kissinger to subvert the aspirations of independence on the part of the Bengalis. Hitchens not only claims that the term genocide is appropriate to describe the results of the struggle, but also points to the efforts of Henry Kissinger in undermining others who condemned the then ongoing atrocities as being a genocide.

However according to Sarmila Bose, a senior research fellow at Oxford University, many Bangladeshi civilians themselves took part in the atrocities and Pakistani troops did not act alone. Her book has proved highly controversial within India and Bangladesh as the popular narrative she states within these countries is that Bangladeshi nationalists won independence in 1971 from Pakistan. She also stated that the death toll was highly inflated.