& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Recognising the Indian soldiers’ sacrifice
*** Strategically Speaking ---- The visit of the Indian delegation was a historic event, and was the first ever in the 37 years of our independence. And all these brave soldiers fought shoulder to shoulder with our freedom fighters. But more importantly, these men were the leaders of the more than 1400 lulled and more than 4000 injured Indians in the eastern front. Hosting these gentlemen was a way of acknowledging the sacrifices of the Indian soldiers, and rightly so. *** AS a people we arc forgetful. We forget a good turn done us by a friend as easily as we forget the transgressions committed against us. While the latter paints us in a good light, the former may cast us in the category of the ingrates. What is even worse is that we not only forget the benefaction, we suffer no qualms whatsoever in denying that the assistance was ever rendered at all. And this is what has happened insofar as the Indian contribution to our Liberation War is concerned. We have done everything to wipe out any reference of India to our liberation, particularly of the Indian soldiers, and any attempt to make amends for the error is castigated as antinational.
Comments of certain quarters related to the recent visit of an Indian military delegation reinforce that contention. It is doubly surprising that such comments bordering on invectives, emanate from people, some of whom in their own right command respect because of their scholarship and intellectual erudition, not to speak of objectivity that Is known to be their forte.
hvo shades of opinion have attended the visit of the Indian military delegation composed of some Indian army officers who had participated in the operations in Bangladesh as a part of the Joint Forces in defeating the Pakistan army. They were invited to share with us in the celebrations of our Independence and National Day this year.
One view has been definitely hostile and voluble, the other supportive but rather muted. Surprisingly, the reverse was not the case. And why is it a bad thing to invite some Indian military veterans for March 26 celebrations? Because India had nothing to do with our independence --according to those that are against the visit, who also think that the idea speaks of a gross servile attitude. They could have been invited on the occasion of the Victory Day instead, this group avers. May I make so bold as to suggest that our
Independence and Victory days are different phenomena but are quite the same proposition --March 26, and all that followed by way of political action backed by the military support, resulted in December 16.
The visit of the Indian delegation was a historic event, and was the first ever in the 37 years of our independence. And all these brave soldiers fought shoulder to shoulder with our freedom fighters. But more importantly, these men were the leaders of the more than 1400 killed and more than 4000 injured Indians in the eastern front. Hosting these gentlemen was a way of acknowledging the sacrifices of the Indian soldiers, and rightly so.
Let us not forget that their blood had also coloured the soil of Bangladesh red. It is a soldier's sensitivity that compels me to take issue with those that denigrate a soldier's sacrifice --when that sacrifice has contributed to the liberation of the country. There are many differences on various issues between Bangladesh and India and many unresolved issues, not because
of our fault. But there should be no difference of opinion about the contribution of the Indian military to our liberation. Politics must not come in the way of our acknowledging the reality.
A soldier's valour has always been recognised, even by the enemy that one is fighting against Instances are there when the highest gallantry award was awarded to a soldier whose feat was corroborated by the enemy he died fighting against. And here we are denying the sacrifices of those that helped us get rid of a predatory, genocidal and murderous occupation army.
A soldiers' valour is respected and recognised also by all that respect freedom and those that die for it. And grateful nations have gone to any length to do just that. This reminds me of an anec-dote narrated to me by a Bangladesh ambassador. Not very long ago - in 2001- our ambassador to Brussels was invited by the Mayor of Ypres to attend the commemoration ceremony of the battle of Ypres (in WW I). Our ambassador was
flustered. Surely, he couldn't have participated in it, and neither could have any Bangladeshi either. But his bewilderment was short lived.
It just so happened that there were seven with the surname of Choudhury in the list of the dead. The Mayor of Ypres was not sure of the exact Identity of the Choudhurics. The organisers thought that they could either be Bengalis or Punjabis. And they were not plagued by insensate minds and odious prejudices. And since there was a Bengali ambassador in town the greatest tribute -- to the dead who died far away from home, for a country which may not have been heard of by most people at home -- they thought would be to Invite him at the commemoration ceremony.
In honouring the fallen soldiers the people of Ypres honoured themselves by demonstrating their gratefulness for those that helped preserve their freedom, even if some of those were not of their kith orkin.
One would like to ask if there is any rationale in the view that India had nothing to do with our liberation, but only with our independence. History informs us otherwise. Just imagine if we had no place to run our government-in-exile, or the operational bases for the freedom fighters to operate from. What would have been the predicament, both at the diplomatic and military front? The logistic support to the Mukti Bahini at
the very seminal stages, rendered under the codename '‘Operation Jackpot," was invaluable, and those in the war zone during the initial days after the Pakistani crackdown know only too well the significance of it.
A good thing that has occurred during the visit is the frank and unreserved acknowledgement by the leader of the delegation Gen. Jacob, the Chief of Staff of Eastern Command during 1971 (he was not the commander, as some section of the media has referred to him), of the fact that it was the Mukti Bahini that predominated in the Liberation War of Bangladesh and during the joint offensive culminating in December 16. So long, the Joint Forces war has been painted as Indo-Pak war, the operations of the Bangladesh Liberation Forces reduced to a peripheral role only. It is regrettable that very little is known about the action of the freedom fighters during that phase, and of the time between March 25 and December 3, 1971, that helped overcome the Pakistan army.
Nothing is large enough to adequately compensate for the bloodshed And only little men with little minds would seek recompense for a soldier's sacrifice. But the least that one can do is to acknowledge their contribution. Acknowledging the Indian soldier's sacrifice does not make us lesser Bangladeshis, not doing so certainly makes us lesser human beings.
BngGer, ShahedulAnam Khan ndc psc (Retd)is Ed tot. Defense and Strategic Altars. The Darfy Star