Bangladesh really and truly is a fascinating case of secession. To this day, it is the only territory that has broken away from another country without agreement and has gone on to achieve full international recognition and UN membership. It is therefore the case that I always use to show just how difficult it is for breakaway territories to achieve international acceptance. If you found the video interesting, do please consider helping the channel by subscribing. Many thanks.
It was the Indo Pak of 1971 that resulted in the dismemberment of Pakistan,s Eastern wing from Pakistan. If there was No India Pak war in 1971there would never be any Bangladesh at all.
@World of ticktalkers you don't have any idea. Indian leadership at that time was not foolish . India might have started disintegrating if they would have tried to capture Bangladesh because of its inherent challenges of keeping the union intact. Stop your Ticktalking
3:50 you're missing a crucial point; Leaders in east pakistan didn't just declare independence; they won the election of the whole Pakistan by a large margin yet were denied the deserved transfer of power.
Certain India media outlets states that one reason why India is seemingly still "neutral" on the issue on Ukraine is the fact that during the Jammu-Kashmir War and the Bangladeshi Liberation war, the United States supported Pakistan, while Soviet Russia vetoed any resolutions favoring Pakistan.🤷
It really annoys me when people fail to recognise that Putin's Russia is not the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was the descendant of the Russian empire, and the Russian Federation is the descendant of the largest part of the USSR, but they are not the same entity. Ukraine was the second largest SSR, so anyone saying the actions of the Soviet Union legitimise the actions of Modern Russia against Ukraine is self-deluding. Modi's reasons for not taking a stand against Russia have far more to do with recent relationships than any "historical friendship". If you're actually paying attention, the parrallels between the Russo-Ukrainian war and the Pakistan-Bangladesh war are there, and Ukraine is far more like Bangladesh than Russia is.
@@TheSwedishHistorian They are the legal sucessor of the USSR. Treaties that were made with the USSR are valid and plus India still need military spares from Russia. It takes time to change military equipment. Above 5000+ tanks and other armored cars, planes and other military equipment.
@@user-cx9nc4pj8w its not much about russia being ussr and so support it but its rather opposite ...It was the united states and uk that sent nuclear aircraft careers to attack india ..thats why no indian believes on us and it allies are are always suspicious of them
Welcome to the channel! Thank you so much for the kind comment. I really appreciate it. Please do pass it on to anyone else who you think might be interested! And do perhaps check out some of the other videos.
@World of ticktalkers Bangladesh is keen to make a European Union like trade union for a long time.But it's because of your stupid politicians it is not possible.Just look at the trade deficit between your country and Bangladesh whose more generous towards trade.You have problems even with Nepal and Bhutan because of your big country syndrome.Yes it will take 1,000 years for some trade agreement but it's only because of your politicians.If you want further evidence of why India fears such trade union,then look for why India refused to join RCEP.
@@souvik43209 just pok in next 10 yrs kashmir ll get free of ur extremism. Ask yourself a question why never children of big people fight for g had and free kashmir. Why they study in oxford
Thank you for this very informative video. I really appreciated Bangladesh for their acceptance of refugees fleeing Myanmar. Such a country with a high population, but was willing to accept more.
Thanks Dave. Really glad you found it interesting. It was such a fascinating case. In fact, Bangladesh’s independence was unique in modern international politics.
James, thanks for making a posting the video. It's kind of depressing how many hurdles there are for self-determination, and just all the stars lined up right for Bangladesh independence. But it's good to be educated, and it's good to know that at least one modern people were fortunate (albeit purchased with their own blood and suffering) at least once.
Thanks for the kind support. Yes, it is indeed depressing to see how many hurdles there are. This is part of the reason why I started the channel. Many people just believe that there should be a right of self-determination. However, I’m trying to show why this is a lot more difficult - for legal, political and practical reasons - than many might realise. It is incredible to think that only one country has managed to break away and get full international acceptance over the past 70 years!
Despite all the stars aligning, independence still came at a great cost to Bangladesh. Millions killed directly by Pakistan and indirectly as a result of famine and disease. Those left alive were starving and traumatised in the midst of a complete societal collapse. The pakistanis killed off thousands of intellectuals, and university students as a final act of hatred, robbing the country of potential post-war leaders. Bangladesh had to start from scratch in every sense of the word. It's incredible that today Bangladesh significantly outperforms Pakistan in practically every socio-economic measure.
@@danhitt167 Cheers. There's a lot to learn from Bangladesh's war of independence, but most people couldn't give less of a shit. You could probably dedicate an entire lifetime just studying the vital role that language and literature played in Bangladeshi independence. Seriously, Bengali is full of absolutely cracking patriotic slogans, poems, songs and speeches.
Thank you so much. I had long been fascinated with Bangladesh’s story of independence. It really is unique in modern international relations. I certainly hope to do more on the country and South Asia in general.
Thank you very much indeed. It is a truly fascinating and important story. One of my favourite cases of state creation in modern international politics,
Egypt foreign ministry with the help of Boutros ghali the Egyptian secretary general of the United Nations and the arab leauge in the 1990s played a major role in blocking/delaying/Sabotaging somalilands bid for Independence. But things are changing and somaliland’s formal recognition is nearer than it ever was.
The northern Somali provinces of Awadal, Sool, Sanaag and Ayn don’t want to be part of an entity called Somaliland they want to be part of Somalia that’s why it will never gain independent as a country as most people in the region who are not isaaq are against the idea
@@XMan-qu5kl the union was between somaliland and Somalia two equal entities dumbass stating bunch of districts won't change that and the fact that isaaq makes up 70% of somaliland's population. All this will end with a referendum were the 70% will come in handy plus the dir(samaroon/ciise) are pro somaliland which will bring the number to 85%-90% in favor for dissolving the failed union and your darood bitching won't do anything keep holding on to your failed union like you are still holding on to the rotting corpse of the past kacaan regime cause you aren't good at moving on
@@AO00720 Gadabuursi, Dhulbahante and Warsengeli the three largest clans in the north don’t want to be part of entity called Somaliland they want to be part of Somalia how is that gonna be resolve ? Isaaq don’t want to be ruled by bigger clans but would rather impose tyranny by majority in regions like Awadal, Sool and Sanaag and Cayn. Isaaq might be 70% in the north which by the way I highly doubt it but 60% of the land in the north belongs to Gadabuursi, Dhulbahante and Warsengeli how is gonna be resolved. Let Isaaq be in the independent in the regions that they are majority but let other clans choose wether to be part of Somalia or Somaliland
What we should also see is that the world opinion though changed against Pakistan, India entering the conflict was also not seen as a good sign by West. If it were not for the Treaty of Friendship with USSR we wouldn't have been able to support Bangladesh since US and UK had embarked their naval fleets in Bay of Bengal. In fact it is said that US also asked China for some sort of help to divert India's attention. We should also keep this in mind that before announcement of secession, easy Pakistani leader Sheikh Rehman won the national elections and was thus the legitimate leader of the entirety of Pakistan but he was arrested by General Yahya Khan. This infuriated not only him but thousands of others who supported him thereby intensifying their demands of independence.
Full India backing to Bangladesh independence was the key. Pakistan only had lukewarm support from her allies - namely the US and China on Bangladesh independence.
80 countries voted against India in UNSC, India got away only by Soviet Veto. USA's 7th fleet and British Eagle came to rescue but didn't engage due to fear of direct Soviet retaliation . What other help Pakistan needed ??
Dear James, always a pleasure to watch your videos. Quick question - would not Eritrea be in the same category as Bangladesh? Or is it different because there was a significant period of time between the declaration of independence and international recognition.
Ram Ganohariti well ethiopia agreed to held a Referendum to let the people decide, besides the eritrean liberation front with other rebel groups in ethiopia seized power after overthrowing of a dictatorship and the rebels drafted Constitution that allows self-determination article so eritrea enacted that article and held a referendum. So eritrea is very much different from bangladesh hope that answers your question.
Thanks for all the support. It means a lot. Eritrea is a fascinating case as well (and I’ll certainly aim to cover it too). The key difference is that independence in the case of Eritrea came following Ethiopia’s acceptance of its right to vote on statehood. So, technically independence came with permission from the parent state. However, as we both know, there was an interesting twist to the story concerning the way that this permission came about. It can in fact be considered to be coerced permission! So, it rather falls in a fascinating grey zone. :-)
Thanks, Ahmed. I agree. Eritrea was different. However, it too was a very unusual case, for the reasons you mentioned. I’ll certainly aim to look at it as well.
It was biggest surrender of 93,000 Pakistani war criminals after world War 2, the same Pakistani war criminals who committed rape and gruesome killings in Bangladesh repeated thier atrocities in balochistan. Even to this day, Pakistan has not apologized for its shameful and gruesome killings in the present day Bangladesh, Truly Evil people. And India had to intervene because Pakistan Army first attacked India, hence India was pulled to war by pakistan. The then U.S President Nixon knew the atrocities committed by Pakistani army in East Pakistan, yet he supported it and threatened India with 7th fleet when India had to intervene, This was Task force 74, Pure Evil was taking over. Enter USSR, which saved India from U.S navy's 7th fleet with its nuclear submarines, which laid the ground work of present day India Russia ties!
@@Sonyasaad India is a huge country, like a continent itself, hence it's not perfect, India is far from perfect but it's a fact that India is a global rising superpower. Indian administered kashmir and not Indian occupied Kashmir J and k, Ladakh is a integral part of India. It's the POK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) that is illigally occupied by Pakistan, please read the UN resolution in which First rule is for Pakistan to leave it's illigal occupation, only then 2nd and 3rd rule to be followed. Jammu and Kashmir is moving towards prosperity. Unlike Pakistan where a army owns a country, India atleast has a judicial system. For the attack on Amritsar golden temple, prime minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated, and the killing of muslims was a very unfortunate event in Gujarat, but it started after killing of Hindus who were burnt alive in a train. So you can't blame PM Modi, Things were out of control. I understand, many people hate modi and India, I'm myself not a fan of Modi, but there is enormous fake news about India. INDIA IS NOT PERFECT, no country is. But I'm sick of fake news about India, Muslims are among top positions in India, many examples i can give. Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, former president of India, was a muslim. I can give many examples, My best friend is a muslim.... I can go on and on after many peoples hate towards India, see India recently was among the first country to send aid to Turkey when the earthquake rocked the country and also sent it's army. India sent FREE COVID vaccination to many poor country FOR FREE, See i can go on and on i don't have time. Let me conclude, INDIA IS NOT A PERFECT COUNTRY, but not so much as exaggerated by many western media or other media who hate india. Many hate the fact is India rising superpower, by 2030 India is gonna overtake Germany.
@@Naresh_king500 dear bro...indian kashmir is occupied..agr ap kehte ho pakistan kashmir occupied h to pakistan k sena is wakt azad kashmir k kitni or india k sena is wakt indian occupied m kitni h🤣🤣🤣 or uno m aap gye the apne waha raye shumri mtpb voting krwani h ke kashmiri kis k sath jaana chahte h..ok ye ap decide nhn kro ge..or jo aap 1947 maharaja sign k baat krte ho ke usne india ko sign kia to phir juna garh ne pakistan ko sign kia ispe apke kya vichar hain🤔🤔😂😂😂😂 or deccan ko to apne qabja kia nizam ko janta ki killing k dhamki dekar history khuli h bhai...ap muslim k success india m bta rhe hto to 2/4 k success se sb sukhi hjate h kya phir to aese pakistan ka bhi chief justice hindu reh chuka h 😂😂😂 pakistan movement m kuch hindu bhi the or bht se poston pe bethe h sikh b hain army m😂😂😂 per ispe to ap kehte ho pakistan m julum h...sb se bara antar india pakistan ka ye hai ie religious phaddo m apki govt involve hti h jiska major example babri masjid..hijab ban..nagrikta bill..article 370 h..mgr pakistan m kbhi govt involve nhn h iska challenge h apko...kher next war water war h jee..lets see whats happend...idhr modi lahore ajae to ghaddar nhn udhar sidhu pakistan ajae to ghaddar😂😂😂🤣😂🤣abe yr dunya sb smjhtti h...bbc modi ko terrorist kahe to ghalat or tmhra media pakistan korea china ko terrorist kahe to sahi🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
99% Bengalis had no sympathy for Pakistan and to Bengalis Pakistan was and still a foreign culture. The Awami league had got almost 99% votes from then East Pakistan in 70's election but Pak military dictatorship was unwilling to handover power to the elected representatives. And there were many protests against in East Pakistan. The Cold war was another important catalyst for our Independence.We got assistance from India and USSR directly. Our struggle for independence and recognition as a state wouldn't be that easy aftermath of cold war era. We would have to wait like the up to collapse of Pakistan like the former Soviet States.
Bangladesh was the exception, not the rule. The country owes its independence due to the complex geopolitical factors of the day. I find it interesting that so many territories have declared unilateral secession since 1945 yet only Bangladesh was successful. East Timor and South Sudan also seceded from their countries (Indonesia and Sudan, respectively) however East Timor was independent before Indonesia annexed the territory while South Sudan seceded because of a referendum approved by the Sudanese government so they don't count. I just mentioned them because their stories are interesting like Bangladesh.
@World of ticktalkers no, India could have conquered Bangladesh but never hold it. The guerilla warfare of Bengalis against Pakistani occupiers would easily have turned their aim at India. The Bangladeshi population was simply too large to be occupied for long.
Well bangladesh is a very unique country with great history. it has blessing from the almighty Allah. Other wise no country get indepent and recognized globally after 1947. It was a the unique case after the war it was devastating situation but now it's a prosperous rising country🇧🇩
Is very sad that they nedded a genocide to be independent... It remains me of the tamil fighting in Tamil Eelam where the Srli Lanka army killed civilians... But in this case India and the western countries turn a blind eye... Almost 100.000 people was killed in 100 days in 2009.
Thanks. Yes. The particularly violent end of the civil war in Sri Lanka is often raised as an example of how the international community will often turn a blind eye to armed suppression of secessionist movements. Croatia in 1995 is another good example. And yet, in the case of Bangladesh, an armed suppression of separatism was seen as a justification for independence. Obviously, there isn’t always a lot of consistency in international relations!
Pakistan not recognize Bangladesh because of pressure but because of Simla agreement between Z.A bhutto and Indira Gandhi. As a result india release 44k Pow and other GOVT. officials of west Pakistan and Bangladesh got UN membership.
We always wanted to live as proud Pakistani since the partition in 1947. But you guys need to go back what you did to us!! 23 years of oppression! You never treated us as Pakistani. Your leaders and military dictators always treated us differently in all aspects. We had no option except independence led by Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
Pakistani generals said that they wanted to change the RACE OF BENGALIS because they weren't islamised enough. That's how they justified mass scale you know what..
It is interesting that, following all the allegations of genocide by Pakistan Armed Forces, there was never an equivalent of a Nuremberg trial of the perpetrators of the genocide in Bangladesh, or the one held for main figures in the genocide in Bosnia such as Radko Mladic and Slobodan Milosevic. Neither did the newly independent Bangladesh seek reparations or present a case with the ICC. One would have thought that this would be an obvious course of action. Any thoughts, sir, on why this never happened?
@@Neel71 Thank you for your response, sir. But I am not sure that answers my question at all, besides putting the blame on India, Pakistan, US, the weather, anyone else apart from the newly sovereign country whose people were apparently genocided, for not taking up the matter internationally and bringing the perpetrators to justice. The suspicious lack of follow-up on this very important part of the founding myth of Bangladesh casts a wide hole on the genesis of the entire project. None of the explanations you have offered is reason enough to not seek justice for victims of a genocide, especially when it is so prominently proclaimed. Why couldn’t the matter be taken to the UN which would set up a commission to investigate war crimes and genocides? There was no ICC during the Nuremberg trials either if you catch my drift. It is not as if the UN consists of the US alone; there was the Soviet bloc and that latter were at the height of their influence. It is not as if the Bangladeshi leadership did not hear of things like the UN, UNHRC etc! Is it too early to conclude that no genocide in fact took place and it was all part of a propaganda effort?
@@sriharshacv7760 It is Bangladesh which did not step forward with any allegations in front of international agencies. They have a strident anti-Israel position, however, and uses international fora regularly to make statements about the alleged genocide taking place there. Priorities......
@@krishnanunnimadathil8142 post independance Bangladesh was a country that lacked any semblance of political stability. From mass poverty and descruction BAKSAL to the assasination of Mujibur Rahman to the millitary rule. Do you really think that in this policial situation Bangladesh could have effectively argued its case for war reperations and trials? Even to this day with Bangladesh's economy beocming stronger than the dumster fire that is the pakistani economy pakistan still refuses to teach what happened in Bangladesh during the events of 1971 or even just give a state apology and recognition to the events, let alone reperations. That pill is simply to large for their government to swallow. Both of which were calls made by Bangladesh in order to improve the outstanding tenions left. In more modern times Bangladesh has set up an international war crimes tribunal which garnered support from the EU. Even this was controversial however with some more religously extrmist pro pakistani sympathiers being against the tribunal. Obviously aspects of opposition towards the tribunal were on transparency which is a fair point to be made but a large section of the oppostion towards it was pro pakistani, which shows that the legacy of the war is still contenoius for religous extremists so taking a more vetemently opposed postion against pakistan is still hard to do.
As a Bangladeshi American I appreciate your balanced presentation factual analysis and discussions. I was fortunate enough to join the freedom fight as a doctor in 1971 from the USA. As you know Pakistan was co-opted for the ( the well known encirclement) SEATO CENTO defense treatise for the defense of the USA against Soviet Russia !The Prime Minister of Pakistan Hussain Shahid Suhrawadee, who was from Bengal, signed the treaty (1956) with president Eisenhower was himself removed from power with in a few years (1958) by General Ayyub Khan turning Pakistan in to a military dictatorship. East Bengal had a 54% majority in the central government of Pakistan initially! But in 1954 they surrendered their majority for the sake of brotherly equality or something like that! After that the West Pakistanis were very difficult to handle as the seat of power was in the western wing of the country. USA probably had a lot to do to ruin Pakistani democracy for their own necessities ! Thanks.
Bangladesh is a rich military nation and holds a great position in world government and world family nations governments. The earlier Bangladesh national movements plays a great role in the rise of mankind and also the philosophy of truth and justice. The capitol of Bangladesh is Dhaka and its currency is bangladeshi taka.
@@Pikkinmink7 I believe takka is Bengali for money. And in India the rupees is called Takka in its state of Bengal (West Bengal). So its called what it should be.
Bangladesh is not only country with a unique case. East Timor is also another troubled country which succeed from Indonesia and recognized from the former parent nation Indonesia as well, joining United Nations in year 2002.
Thanks. I made a video on East Timor. It is actually a very different case to Bangladesh. East Timor is a case of thwarted decolonisation. It had a right to independence, but was invaded and occupied by Indonesia. It was therefore never regarded by the world as Indonesian territory. So, it wasn’t a case of secession. Bangladesh was regarded as an integral part of Pakistan and so is a case of secession. I hope that clears it up. You might also take a look at my video on self-determination.
I always wanted to know what if the parent state wants to break away. Then what how would you solve it. And what makes one a parent state and one the infant state. Is there a criteria
Great question! Almost always it is a part of a country that wants to break away. There have been almost no cases where the majority of a country wants to leave the rest. One obvious example was Russia and the Soviet Union, but the USSR was in the process of collapsing and so it doesn’t quite fit. The key thing is that the part that walks away is the one that has to apply for UN membership and get recognition. This means few countries want to do this. If things get so bad they would prefer to kick out the troublesome part than walk away. But this is actually incredibly rare. Indeed, there had been only one such case since 1945: Singapore, which was forced out of Malaysia. I actually hope to cover this in a future video. It is a fascinating story.
I think Malaysia kicked out Singapore, but I might be wrong there. As far as I can recall it was because the Singaporean government party, the People's Action Party, was too popular and Malaysia wanted them gone.
I don't get it. What makes the secession unilateral if the central government accepted the move? And only 3 years after the fact? I understand that some 40 countries recognized independence of Bangladesh before Islamabad, but it became part of international community after the central government "accepted this reality". (Fifth permanent UNSC member recognition came after Islamabad's) I don't even see it as unilateral move, 3 years is barely time enough for a country to choose it's course of action, am I the only one who sees it this way?
@@hasanchoudhury5401 I'm from Serbia, Kosovo declared independence in 2008, after 14 years, with all the pressure from the west and the EU, majority partner of foreign trade, we are still VERY far from social consensus, any sort of long term plan for the resolution of this problem. So, what I said, I said having in mind situation in my country. Though, it is simpler, in case of Serbia, it's essentially Albanian irredentism trying to expand into Serbia, not some new stateless people who want their right to self-determination. Regardless, even if the plan was to grant them secession (simplest solution) - Serbia doesn't even have its list of conditions.
@@m1k4c If you see it correctly, the West had done something similar even in Serbia. If you observe news, there had been a disproportionate coverage against Serbia so that a narrative to separate Kosovo is built. Only reason why Europe still doesn't really follow through is because Albania is itself not willing to commit soldiers for take over of Kosovo (or help them militarily). Adding to the fact that despite their hatred for Serbia (& Russia), many among their (rest of Europe) own population are themselves against supporting the secession of an Islamic region from a Christian country. This is not such a clear cut case as in Bangladesh (both Pak and BD are Muslim).
@@sriharshacv7760 Kosovo is already Albanian, there's no need for Albania to "take over". At least no need to waste blood in taking it over, they always believed in demographic "victory", and they achieved it, by having 8 kids per family in average when Serbs living in the same province went below 2.1 threshold. For the better part of Europe, it's already a done deal, there's nothing to "follow through" about it. 5 EU countries don't recognize Kosovo, but you can't really expect Cyprus (or Greece) to recognize it before Belgrade does. That doesn't stop Greece from establishing an office for cooperation, which is just a different temporary name for an embassy. Yes, they bombed Serbia to "prevent genocide", when the bombing started, after few days NATO spokesman J.Shai said it's to "stop the genocide", several years after the war ended the figures were published in "Kosovo book of memory" - 2.000 dead in two years of terrorist insurgency before the bombing started (almost no civilians) and 11.500 in 78 days, after the bombing started. Ofc, this doesn't stop some German ambassadors and similar crap to continue blabing about their humanitarian, noble intervention. So, yes, propaganda is always there. Truth is the first casualty of every war. There's a reason why they bombed our national tv infrastructure every day. And head building. It's the same with this war we have today - they banned Russia today and Sputnik the same day Russia invaded. As if Ukraine is the first war after the WW1. Today, a new initiative with some "new framework" for the "dialogue" is active, just one more attempt to force Belgrade to recognize secession while offering vague nothing in return, this is something that's been going on for the last 23 years, so you don't have to tell me how the Political West functions. As all the countries of the global South - we know. (don't look at the map, Serbia IS global south after the 90s) So, I am SURE that Islamabad was pressured to recognize secession and probably be thankful afterwards, I am well aware how this thing works. I remind you, Serbia was under very harsh sanctions for 8 years because it tried to preserve Yugoslavia and, even today it's under NATO control. We can't buy weapons wherever we want from, we can't buy oil from Russia, soon we won't be able to buy gas either, western diplomats are behaving like colonial administrators here. And - to spare you an essay or a book I could write about all forms of pressure, arm-twisting, blackmails and humiliation we are forced to live with - my point was very simple - BELGRADE STILL DID NOT RECOGNIZE KOSOVO. I am aware that Islamabad was forced to accept this, I wouldn't doubt it even if I knew nothing about it, on top of my people's collective experience, I am a historian, so - I DO KNOW. The thing is - even after 23 years of relative isolation and remembering 8 years of "bread-lines" before that, I can't imagine what sort of pressure would they have to apply (perhaps bomb us again) to force Belgrade to do it. Islamabad did it - after only few years. I am not saying that one is good and the other bad, it's just that Islamabad went through with it. So, there are no obstacles for full recognition and UN membership. And few years isn't really that long. I really don't see anything special about it. Secessions are often one-sided and the terms of secession are often negotiated with the central government after the fact. "Often" - relating to colonies and pre-ww1 secessions, today we don't have them so often. So I really don't see anything that controversial about Bangladesh case.
I think it was probably both. The distance was a key factor, but so was the fact that West Pakistan clearly saw East Pakistan as a lesser part of the state in all sorts of different ways.
From my freedom father I heard current Pakistan used properties of Bangladesh to just only develop Pakistan(when both Pakistan Bangladesh were one country)..but not developed Bangladesh(intentionally pakistan ignored this)..they killed intentionally Bangladesh's more power people (like Doctor,teacher etc) during war so that Bangladesh never stand ..but fortunately it doesn't work ..Bangladesh stand back although they lost many reputed peoples.
I don't hate Pakistanis or Pakistan. If read and watch the news archives from that time. You will see West Pakistan was draining capital and military from East Pakistan. West Pakistan tried force Bengali businessman to open business in West Pakistan, also tried to force the scientist, doctors, engineers and teacher to go to West Pakistan and speak Urdu too, which had lead to the break up between the territories with the influence from US, European and middle eastern nations behind West Pakistan. The corruption came from West Pakistan. The Awami League wanted to operate with thier own government because of this corruption, exploitation and to leave East Pakistan defenceless. This was after Bongo bondhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman kept on going back and forth to West Pakistan to come up with an agreement that is good for both terrorise. West Pakistan started a cowardly attack on it's own people in East Pakistan. Everyone seen the separation coming because of the corruption from West Pakistan away before the genocide in Bangladesh. Which massacre was aim at killing the Bengali intellects. This corruption still continues in Pakistan by the same people with the Balochistanis. And if you look at Bangladesh freed from the corruption in Pakistan it is doing very well to come out of poverty and develop it's national as Sheikh Mujibur Rahman planed it.
Thanks. That is a fascinating idea to ponder. Of course, there are already some separatist movements in the US, but they don’t seem to get much traction. But it is fascinating to think what sort of world we’d face if we woke up tomorrow and there was no more United Stare, but instead a number of other independent states. I do wonder if many would soon start looking for closer integration along the lines of the European Union. I suspect they would.
@@JamesKerLindsay the only state independence movement ik is calexit and if every state would split up there won't be a US i've seen a video of someone saying what if all states became independent but it was kinda clickbait since it only talked about texas and California
There is a massive chance that this video gets downvoted considering you mentioned at 4:34 that India's military involvement had a decisive effect on the creation of an independent Bangladesh. In recent times (since past 20y or so), there is a huge political trend in Bangladesh where they are attempting to minimize India's role in the attainment of Bangladesh's freedom. It is sad but that where things stand in 2022.
1) Borders were just plain unfair 2) Hurricane tht killed over 100k lives and still govt in western Pakistan didnt provide much aid 3) Overall discrimination, repulsive treatment and maddening 2 province system (yes east and west Pakistan thts all) 4) Indian involvement in arming mukti clan and then direct intervention 5) Pakistan army was not as strong as today in its conventional weapons let alone nuclear weapons it has today
What about North and South Korea. Haven't they broken away from each other? So Bangladesh is not the only country that broke away as territory? Also you have Somalia and SamaliLand? I can also think of other countries in a similar situation as Bangladesh.
@@badrulhussain5545 because they didnt do secession what happened there was a partition of a same group of people due to artificial ideologies( in this case communism and capitalism) . It is like the partition of india where india's muslim Majority regions broke away to create pakistan .( the ideology of islamic supremacy was the cause in this case)
@@badrulhussain5545 many have tried but they dont suceed , somalia-somaliland and sudan-south sudan r more such examples but they cant be termed a sucess
Great question. I suspect that it could have become a de facto state. India would probably have supported it, and with Pakistan so far away and unable to assert control it may have existed in some sort of legal limbo. Widely accepted, but not a member of the United Nations.
@@JamesKerLindsay before Bangladesh became free,U can say both east and west pakistan infiltrate and war in1947-48,65 against india so why India helped them rather than let it be.bcz Bangladesh hates indian only bcz of the religion.so sad india fought against pak gor the peace of bangla and also stop us and uk to come against it.and indian army sacrifice life for them. Although bangla says it's not indian it's their only mukti bahini sena fought for the bangla
@@saanvi5660 firstly how can you be comparing the lives of only 12 thousand indian soldiers who died compared to 3 freaking million east pakistanis who fought and endured for 9 months and lost their lives to become bangladesh? were indians dying by the millions? nope. it was east pakistanis/ bengalis, never forget that and secondly, if india is so mighty why didn't they not help right at the start of operation searchlight when the punjabi west pak military started their slaughter? why did they wait for 9 months and only enter the east when the indian bases were attacked? that is very sus and it seems like india was only looking out for their own interest when they helped us, it was not a selfless act of heroism like most indians claim. but i am grateful to india that they did come in and defeat pak army but i find it pathetic how majority of the indians like to take full credit for what happened back then. it's like russian military taking full credit for any victories they enjoy in ukraine when in reality it was the separatist forces lpr and dpr doing the fighting for the last 8 years, not the russian military.
I came early in April 1971 from the USA with a special visa from the NY Indian Embassy on my Pakistani passport, to join the Mukti Bahini as a doctor and was in the sector 2 ! I met some of Mukti Bahini and Bangladeshi government personnel as well as Indian officials ! The impression I got was that initially India was happy to see that the enemy was breaking apart. Very high officials and generals came to Agartala very early ( April May June ) to assess the ground level enthusiasm and reality of the youths because there were some hesitancy about the levels of commitments of the insurgents. They could see that the rebel military officers and the politicians had no choice but to defend their own lives. But we the volunteers were there on our own enthusiasm. It is my understanding from what I have read that the top Indian generals wanted to wait for the dry season and avoid the rainy monsoon season. Also they wanted to prepare well with full forces all set to their best !
@@AntiDegenerate1971 pakistan isn't only India's enemy China is bigger treat to India so India had to make sure Chinese nor the US will intervene also idia waited for snowfalls in himalayas that makes Chinese troops deployment hard. Pakistan at that time was powerful no matter how hard Bangladesh freedom fighters would have fought without India Bangladesh would never been independent
The video was interesting, but there are few interpretations that are completely incorrect. The number of refugees of almost 10 million is an Indian figure and should not be accepted at face value, it was repeated by everyone because in those days there weren't sufficient resources for independent verification. Refugees do not return to their home countries overnight, even after a conflict has finished, it takes years, even then it's a hard push. Look at the population figures of Bangladesh, there's hardly a glitch. Plus in a conflict birth rate also goes down, such influences are not reflected in Bangladeshi population figures. Correct interpretation is important otherwise it amounts to repeating lies. Secondly, there was no partition of India, because India has never existed as a country nor a nation in history. If the term partition must be used, then it's proper and factually correct to say British India. It was the colony of British India that was partitioned, not India, there's a factual difference. It needs to be recognised, otherwise, again it amounts to repeating lies. Another important factor was that India signed a treaty of friendship with the Soviets just months before attacking Pakistan, this was done in collusion with the Soviets, and indira Gandhi went on a tour of World capitals just months before attacking, obviously in order to judge the acceptability of such an attack. Naked state backed terrorism aspect has been ignored in your evaluation. This is not to ignore the genuine issue's that you've already covered.
You always miss out the most important factors. East Pakistan was main source of income for West Pakistan while West Pakistan developed, East remained impoverished. Plus the Bengali language wasn't recognized as official. Moreover, while just 2.5 years after Independence, India adopted a constitution and became a democratic republic, Pakistan's interim constitution of 1965 was nullified and country fell under military dictatorship. The dictator changed after 1965 war with India but the dictatorship remained. In 1970, the Election was held for the first time and the East Pakistani leader Sheikh Mujib-Ur-Rahman got the majority of the vote, but the military dictatorship didn't accept the public mendate. Mujib already wanted certain autonomy for East Pakistan which wasn't accepted by West Pakistan. Finally in March 1971, Mujib declared independence, military cracked down heavily and mass rape and genocide started happening all over East Pakistan. Also a massive flood came in East in 1970 which killed thousands and displaced many more. If you watch the BBC interview of then dictator Yahya Khan, he first said, flood came, people died, not my fault. Then, when more than 10 million of East Pakistanis came to India as refugees, Yahya again refused to acknowledge and simply said that they were Indians only in the refugee camps. Meanwhile, US president Nixon and his secratery Henry Kissinger supported Pakistani dictatorship despite many still being killed. Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi travelled to nearly 80 countries to get the support and pressurize Pakistan and got only one support in the form of USSR. India also trained young Bengalis from the refugee camps and help in the creation of a guerrilla force called Mukti Bahini. India prepared for months and in the final moments of the war, USSR helped veto a motion against India in UNSC. It was around 80 countries with support for Pakistan vs just USSR supporting India. USA and Britain also dispatched their navies in support of Pakistan but decided not to engage with India in the fear of direct Soviet retaliation. Finally, Pakistani general surrendered on 16th Dec 1971 in front of Gen Jagjit Singh Arora, joint leader of Indian and Bangladeshi forces and bangladesh was created. There is a reason there is still a deep sentiment in Indian public regarding this event When India got opposed by 80 countries diplomatically and threated by western powers while supported by Soviets in this war. The Soviet support has later consequences, but it mattered at the time. India also used Mig-21s and other Soviet weapons in this war while West denied selling to India the key weapons. And like in modern day Ukrain war, when West claims to be on the side of the morality, they forget how many times they have supported mass murderer dictators and regimes. Also, interesting to note that China was the last major country to recognize Bangladesh in 1975.
"I always miss out the most important factors." Seems a bit strong. These are short introductory videos. They aren't meant to be the final word on any situation. Do any of these factors really change the points I made? East Pakistan wanted independence and felt aggrieved at their treatment by the West. That's all in the video. The precise detailed reasons that you explain just emphasise that. Perhaps be a little reasonable in your expectations?
Bangladesh really and truly is a fascinating case of secession. To this day, it is the only territory that has broken away from another country without agreement and has gone on to achieve full international recognition and UN membership. It is therefore the case that I always use to show just how difficult it is for breakaway territories to achieve international acceptance.
If you found the video interesting, do please consider helping the channel by subscribing. Many thanks.
It is very helpful. Want to meet you!
Matata453@gmail.com
It was the Indo Pak of 1971 that resulted in the dismemberment of Pakistan,s Eastern wing from Pakistan. If there was No India Pak war in 1971there would never be any Bangladesh at all.
The irony is there was actually a vote for secession, which won!
@World of ticktalkers you don't have any idea. Indian leadership at that time was not foolish . India might have started disintegrating if they would have tried to capture Bangladesh because of its inherent challenges of keeping the union intact. Stop your Ticktalking
3:50 you're missing a crucial point; Leaders in east pakistan didn't just declare independence; they won the election of the whole Pakistan by a large margin yet were denied the deserved transfer of power.
yes that's very true
Certain India media outlets states that one reason why India is seemingly still "neutral" on the issue on Ukraine is the fact that during the Jammu-Kashmir War and the Bangladeshi Liberation war, the United States supported Pakistan, while Soviet Russia vetoed any resolutions favoring Pakistan.🤷
It really annoys me when people fail to recognise that Putin's Russia is not the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was the descendant of the Russian empire, and the Russian Federation is the descendant of the largest part of the USSR, but they are not the same entity. Ukraine was the second largest SSR, so anyone saying the actions of the Soviet Union legitimise the actions of Modern Russia against Ukraine is self-deluding. Modi's reasons for not taking a stand against Russia have far more to do with recent relationships than any "historical friendship". If you're actually paying attention, the parrallels between the Russo-Ukrainian war and the Pakistan-Bangladesh war are there, and Ukraine is far more like Bangladesh than Russia is.
@@user-cx9nc4pj8w Yes, they are annoying.
@@user-cx9nc4pj8w eh, Russia dominated the USSR which dominated the warsaw pact
@@TheSwedishHistorian They are the legal sucessor of the USSR. Treaties that were made with the USSR are valid and plus India still need military spares from Russia. It takes time to change military equipment. Above 5000+ tanks and other armored cars, planes and other military equipment.
@@user-cx9nc4pj8w its not much about russia being ussr and so support it but its rather opposite ...It was the united states and uk that sent nuclear aircraft careers to attack india ..thats why no indian believes on us and it allies are are always suspicious of them
Love from Bangladesh. ❤️🇧🇩
Thank you! And all my very best wishes from London! :-)
love from india, hoping our countries prosper together
I am from Bangladesh. Thank you very much for your well-organized analysis.
Welcome to the channel! Thank you so much for the kind comment. I really appreciate it. Please do pass it on to anyone else who you think might be interested! And do perhaps check out some of the other videos.
@World of ticktalkers Bangladesh is keen to make a European Union like trade union for a long time.But it's because of your stupid politicians it is not possible.Just look at the trade deficit between your country and Bangladesh whose more generous towards trade.You have problems even with Nepal and Bhutan because of your big country syndrome.Yes it will take 1,000 years for some trade agreement but it's only because of your politicians.If you want further evidence of why India fears such trade union,then look for why India refused to join RCEP.
Just to let you all know that this week’s video will be on Kashmir and can it be solved? I’ll be interested to hear what you all think.
@@souvik43209 just pok in next 10 yrs kashmir ll get free of ur extremism. Ask yourself a question why never children of big people fight for g had and free kashmir. Why they study in oxford
@@getror8753 Don't worry about it
A sequel of Rohingya is coming
This time on the country-level
Thank you for this very informative video. I really appreciated Bangladesh for their acceptance of refugees fleeing Myanmar. Such a country with a high population, but was willing to accept more.
Thanks Dave. Really glad you found it interesting. It was such a fascinating case. In fact, Bangladesh’s independence was unique in modern international politics.
James, thanks for making a posting the video. It's kind of depressing how many hurdles there are for self-determination, and just all the stars lined up right for Bangladesh independence. But it's good to be educated, and it's good to know that at least one modern people were fortunate (albeit purchased with their own blood and suffering) at least once.
Thanks for the kind support. Yes, it is indeed depressing to see how many hurdles there are. This is part of the reason why I started the channel. Many people just believe that there should be a right of self-determination. However, I’m trying to show why this is a lot more difficult - for legal, political and practical reasons - than many might realise. It is incredible to think that only one country has managed to break away and get full international acceptance over the past 70 years!
Despite all the stars aligning, independence still came at a great cost to Bangladesh. Millions killed directly by Pakistan and indirectly as a result of famine and disease. Those left alive were starving and traumatised in the midst of a complete societal collapse. The pakistanis killed off thousands of intellectuals, and university students as a final act of hatred, robbing the country of potential post-war leaders.
Bangladesh had to start from scratch in every sense of the word. It's incredible that today Bangladesh significantly outperforms Pakistan in practically every socio-economic measure.
@@Ashitaka255 Thank you so much for posting this.
I think it shows that Bangladesh experience is both a warning but also a great inspiration.
@@danhitt167 Cheers. There's a lot to learn from Bangladesh's war of independence, but most people couldn't give less of a shit.
You could probably dedicate an entire lifetime just studying the vital role that language and literature played in Bangladeshi independence. Seriously, Bengali is full of absolutely cracking patriotic slogans, poems, songs and speeches.
Respect from India! I hope that peace triumphs in the subcontinent. 🇮🇳☮️👍🙏
Thanks for the Information love from🇧🇩
great video sir...i hope you make more videos on bangladesh ...subscribed
Thank you so much. I had long been fascinated with Bangladesh’s story of independence. It really is unique in modern international relations. I certainly hope to do more on the country and South Asia in general.
Very nice analysis
Thank you very much indeed. It is a truly fascinating and important story. One of my favourite cases of state creation in modern international politics,
Egypt foreign ministry with the help of Boutros ghali the Egyptian secretary general of the United Nations and the arab leauge in the 1990s played a major role in blocking/delaying/Sabotaging somalilands bid for Independence. But things are changing and somaliland’s formal recognition is nearer than it ever was.
Ahmed Elmi
So, Somaliland is coming soon ?
Omar Al kayal yep egypt and the arab leauge are to busy with their own shit to care about blocking somalilands Attempts.
The northern Somali provinces of Awadal, Sool, Sanaag and Ayn don’t want to be part of an entity called Somaliland they want to be part of Somalia that’s why it will never gain independent as a country as most people in the region who are not isaaq are against the idea
@@XMan-qu5kl the union was between somaliland and Somalia two equal entities dumbass stating bunch of districts won't change that and the fact that isaaq makes up 70% of somaliland's population. All this will end with a referendum were the 70% will come in handy plus the dir(samaroon/ciise) are pro somaliland which will bring the number to 85%-90% in favor for dissolving the failed union and your darood bitching won't do anything keep holding on to your failed union like you are still holding on to the rotting corpse of the past kacaan regime cause you aren't good at moving on
@@AO00720 Gadabuursi, Dhulbahante and Warsengeli the three largest clans in the north don’t want to be part of entity called Somaliland they want to be part of Somalia how is that gonna be resolve ? Isaaq don’t want to be ruled by bigger clans but would rather impose tyranny by majority in regions like Awadal, Sool and Sanaag and Cayn. Isaaq might be 70% in the north which by the way I highly doubt it but 60% of the land in the north belongs to Gadabuursi, Dhulbahante and Warsengeli how is gonna be resolved. Let Isaaq be in the independent in the regions that they are majority but let other clans choose wether to be part of Somalia or Somaliland
What we should also see is that the world opinion though changed against Pakistan, India entering the conflict was also not seen as a good sign by West. If it were not for the Treaty of Friendship with USSR we wouldn't have been able to support Bangladesh since US and UK had embarked their naval fleets in Bay of Bengal. In fact it is said that US also asked China for some sort of help to divert India's attention. We should also keep this in mind that before announcement of secession, easy Pakistani leader Sheikh Rehman won the national elections and was thus the legitimate leader of the entirety of Pakistan but he was arrested by General Yahya Khan. This infuriated not only him but thousands of others who supported him thereby intensifying their demands of independence.
Very interesting. Great channel !
Full India backing to Bangladesh independence was the key. Pakistan only had lukewarm support from her allies - namely the US and China on Bangladesh independence.
80 countries voted against India in UNSC, India got away only by Soviet Veto. USA's 7th fleet and British Eagle came to rescue but didn't engage due to fear of direct Soviet retaliation . What other help Pakistan needed ??
Dear James, always a pleasure to watch your videos. Quick question - would not Eritrea be in the same category as Bangladesh? Or is it different because there was a significant period of time between the declaration of independence and international recognition.
Ram Ganohariti well ethiopia agreed to held a Referendum to let the people decide, besides the eritrean liberation front with other rebel groups in ethiopia seized power after overthrowing of a dictatorship and the rebels drafted Constitution that allows self-determination article so eritrea enacted that article and held a referendum. So eritrea is very much different from bangladesh hope that answers your question.
Thanks for all the support. It means a lot. Eritrea is a fascinating case as well (and I’ll certainly aim to cover it too). The key difference is that independence in the case of Eritrea came following Ethiopia’s acceptance of its right to vote on statehood. So, technically independence came with permission from the parent state. However, as we both know, there was an interesting twist to the story concerning the way that this permission came about. It can in fact be considered to be coerced permission! So, it rather falls in a fascinating grey zone. :-)
Thanks, Ahmed. I agree. Eritrea was different. However, it too was a very unusual case, for the reasons you mentioned. I’ll certainly aim to look at it as well.
It was biggest surrender of 93,000 Pakistani war criminals after world War 2, the same Pakistani war criminals who committed rape and gruesome killings in Bangladesh repeated thier atrocities in balochistan. Even to this day, Pakistan has not apologized for its shameful and gruesome killings in the present day Bangladesh, Truly Evil people.
And India had to intervene because Pakistan Army first attacked India, hence India was pulled to war by pakistan.
The then U.S President Nixon knew the atrocities committed by Pakistani army in East Pakistan, yet he supported it and threatened India with 7th fleet when India had to intervene, This was Task force 74, Pure Evil was taking over.
Enter USSR, which saved India from U.S navy's 7th fleet with its nuclear submarines, which laid the ground work of present day India Russia ties!
@@Sonyasaad India is a huge country, like a continent itself, hence it's not perfect, India is far from perfect but it's a fact that India is a global rising superpower.
Indian administered kashmir and not Indian occupied Kashmir J and k, Ladakh is a integral part of India. It's the POK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) that is illigally occupied by Pakistan, please read the UN resolution in which First rule is for Pakistan to leave it's illigal occupation, only then 2nd and 3rd rule to be followed. Jammu and Kashmir is moving towards prosperity. Unlike Pakistan where a army owns a country, India atleast has a judicial system.
For the attack on Amritsar golden temple, prime minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated, and the killing of muslims was a very unfortunate event in Gujarat, but it started after killing of Hindus who were burnt alive in a train. So you can't blame PM Modi, Things were out of control. I understand, many people hate modi and India, I'm myself not a fan of Modi, but there is enormous fake news about India.
INDIA IS NOT PERFECT, no country is. But I'm sick of fake news about India, Muslims are among top positions in India, many examples i can give. Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam, former president of India, was a muslim. I can give many examples, My best friend is a muslim....
I can go on and on after many peoples hate towards India, see India recently was among the first country to send aid to Turkey when the earthquake rocked the country and also sent it's army. India sent FREE COVID vaccination to many poor country FOR FREE, See i can go on and on i don't have time.
Let me conclude, INDIA IS NOT A PERFECT COUNTRY, but not so much as exaggerated by many western media or other media who hate india. Many hate the fact is India rising superpower, by 2030 India is gonna overtake Germany.
@@Naresh_king500 dear bro...indian kashmir is occupied..agr ap kehte ho pakistan kashmir occupied h to pakistan k sena is wakt azad kashmir k kitni or india k sena is wakt indian occupied m kitni h🤣🤣🤣 or uno m aap gye the apne waha raye shumri mtpb voting krwani h ke kashmiri kis k sath jaana chahte h..ok ye ap decide nhn kro ge..or jo aap 1947 maharaja sign k baat krte ho ke usne india ko sign kia to phir juna garh ne pakistan ko sign kia ispe apke kya vichar hain🤔🤔😂😂😂😂 or deccan ko to apne qabja kia nizam ko janta ki killing k dhamki dekar history khuli h bhai...ap muslim k success india m bta rhe hto to 2/4 k success se sb sukhi hjate h kya phir to aese pakistan ka bhi chief justice hindu reh chuka h 😂😂😂 pakistan movement m kuch hindu bhi the or bht se poston pe bethe h sikh b hain army m😂😂😂 per ispe to ap kehte ho pakistan m julum h...sb se bara antar india pakistan ka ye hai ie religious phaddo m apki govt involve hti h jiska major example babri masjid..hijab ban..nagrikta bill..article 370 h..mgr pakistan m kbhi govt involve nhn h iska challenge h apko...kher next war water war h jee..lets see whats happend...idhr modi lahore ajae to ghaddar nhn udhar sidhu pakistan ajae to ghaddar😂😂😂🤣😂🤣abe yr dunya sb smjhtti h...bbc modi ko terrorist kahe to ghalat or tmhra media pakistan korea china ko terrorist kahe to sahi🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
99% Bengalis had no sympathy for Pakistan and to Bengalis Pakistan was and still a foreign culture.
The Awami league had got almost 99% votes from then East Pakistan in 70's election but Pak military dictatorship was unwilling to handover power to the elected representatives.
And there were many protests against in East Pakistan.
The Cold war was another important catalyst for our Independence.We got assistance from India and USSR directly.
Our struggle for independence and recognition as a state wouldn't be that easy aftermath of cold war era.
We would have to wait like the up to collapse of Pakistan like the former Soviet States.
But now Bangladesh is richer than West Bengal, hope you grow and we also grow.
Bangladesh was the exception, not the rule. The country owes its independence due to the complex geopolitical factors of the day. I find it interesting that so many territories have declared unilateral secession since 1945 yet only Bangladesh was successful. East Timor and South Sudan also seceded from their countries (Indonesia and Sudan, respectively) however East Timor was independent before Indonesia annexed the territory while South Sudan seceded because of a referendum approved by the Sudanese government so they don't count. I just mentioned them because their stories are interesting like Bangladesh.
TheConqueringRam East Timor was Portuguese colony it wasnt an independent country
East Timor isn’t unilateral as Indonesia gives independent referendum, meaning the parent country gave permission for independence.
@World of ticktalkers no, India could have conquered Bangladesh but never hold it. The guerilla warfare of Bengalis against Pakistani occupiers would easily have turned their aim at India. The Bangladeshi population was simply too large to be occupied for long.
Well bangladesh is a very unique country with great history. it has blessing from the almighty Allah. Other wise no country get indepent and recognized globally after 1947. It was a the unique case after the war it was devastating situation but now it's a prosperous rising country🇧🇩
Is very sad that they nedded a genocide to be independent... It remains me of the tamil fighting in Tamil Eelam where the Srli Lanka army killed civilians... But in this case India and the western countries turn a blind eye... Almost 100.000 people was killed in 100 days in 2009.
Thanks. Yes. The particularly violent end of the civil war in Sri Lanka is often raised as an example of how the international community will often turn a blind eye to armed suppression of secessionist movements. Croatia in 1995 is another good example. And yet, in the case of Bangladesh, an armed suppression of separatism was seen as a justification for independence. Obviously, there isn’t always a lot of consistency in international relations!
Why didn't you mention Palestine and Kashmir?
@@wajahatmubashir Kashmir is none of your business, better tell about Balochistan.
India is the one who helped Bangladesh gain independence and it was India who helped Tamil freedom fighters who for greed turned against India.
@@hindaviswarajya8853 free Palestine
Didn’t the US do that technically
Pakistan not recognize Bangladesh because of pressure but because of Simla agreement between Z.A bhutto and Indira Gandhi.
As a result india release 44k Pow and other GOVT. officials of west Pakistan and Bangladesh got UN membership.
not 44k ... It was around 90k!!!!
@@amanmaurya4173 Soldier are 44k 90k is the no. With Govt Official deployed at Bengal from east Pakistan
We always wanted to live as proud Pakistani since the partition in 1947. But you guys need to go back what you did to us!! 23 years of oppression! You never treated us as Pakistani. Your leaders and military dictators always treated us differently in all aspects. We had no option except independence led by Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
@@kevintheminion1497 read your generals maine dhaka dubte dekha
Pakistani generals said that they wanted to change the RACE OF BENGALIS because they weren't islamised enough.
That's how they justified mass scale you know what..
@@jam-ss2jc kindly read documents on Google there's clearly written word hindu
And don't forget of Muhammad Ali Jinnah's Grandfather was a Gujarati Hindu
Cool. Enjoy your freedom from Pakistan
It is interesting that, following all the allegations of genocide by Pakistan Armed Forces, there was never an equivalent of a Nuremberg trial of the perpetrators of the genocide in Bangladesh, or the one held for main figures in the genocide in Bosnia such as Radko Mladic and Slobodan Milosevic. Neither did the newly independent Bangladesh seek reparations or present a case with the ICC. One would have thought that this would be an obvious course of action. Any thoughts, sir, on why this never happened?
Because Pakistani army was backed US,UK & France. Henry Kissinger himself congratulated Pakistan after they conducting genocide.
@@Neel71 Thank you for your response, sir. But I am not sure that answers my question at all, besides putting the blame on India, Pakistan, US, the weather, anyone else apart from the newly sovereign country whose people were apparently genocided, for not taking up the matter internationally and bringing the perpetrators to justice.
The suspicious lack of follow-up on this very important part of the founding myth of Bangladesh casts a wide hole on the genesis of the entire project. None of the explanations you have offered is reason enough to not seek justice for victims of a genocide, especially when it is so prominently proclaimed.
Why couldn’t the matter be taken to the UN which would set up a commission to investigate war crimes and genocides? There was no ICC during the Nuremberg trials either if you catch my drift.
It is not as if the UN consists of the US alone; there was the Soviet bloc and that latter were at the height of their influence.
It is not as if the Bangladeshi leadership did not hear of things like the UN, UNHRC etc!
Is it too early to conclude that no genocide in fact took place and it was all part of a propaganda effort?
@@krishnanunnimadathil8142 May be because the European world thinks brown lives are worthless and hence no attention is given.
@@sriharshacv7760 It is Bangladesh which did not step forward with any allegations in front of international agencies. They have a strident anti-Israel position, however, and uses international fora regularly to make statements about the alleged genocide taking place there. Priorities......
@@krishnanunnimadathil8142 post independance Bangladesh was a country that lacked any semblance of political stability. From mass poverty and descruction BAKSAL to the assasination of Mujibur Rahman to the millitary rule. Do you really think that in this policial situation Bangladesh could have effectively argued its case for war reperations and trials? Even to this day with Bangladesh's economy beocming stronger than the dumster fire that is the pakistani economy pakistan still refuses to teach what happened in Bangladesh during the events of 1971 or even just give a state apology and recognition to the events, let alone reperations. That pill is simply to large for their government to swallow. Both of which were calls made by Bangladesh in order to improve the outstanding tenions left. In more modern times Bangladesh has set up an international war crimes tribunal which garnered support from the EU. Even this was controversial however with some more religously extrmist pro pakistani sympathiers being against the tribunal. Obviously aspects of opposition towards the tribunal were on transparency which is a fair point to be made but a large section of the oppostion towards it was pro pakistani, which shows that the legacy of the war is still contenoius for religous extremists so taking a more vetemently opposed postion against pakistan is still hard to do.
As a Bangladeshi American I appreciate your balanced presentation factual analysis and discussions.
I was fortunate enough to join the freedom fight as a doctor in 1971 from the USA.
As you know Pakistan was
co-opted for the ( the well known encirclement) SEATO CENTO defense treatise for the defense of the USA against Soviet Russia !The Prime Minister of Pakistan Hussain Shahid Suhrawadee, who was from Bengal, signed the treaty (1956) with president Eisenhower was himself removed from power with in a few years (1958) by General Ayyub Khan turning Pakistan in to a military dictatorship. East Bengal had a 54% majority in the central government of Pakistan initially!
But in 1954 they surrendered their majority for the sake of brotherly equality or something like that! After that the West Pakistanis were very difficult to handle as the seat of power was in the western wing of the country.
USA probably had a lot to do to ruin Pakistani democracy for their own necessities ! Thanks.
Thanks for your great contribution. We won our motherland because of your efforts. I hope you stay healthy and fine.
Why did you forget to thank india 🇮🇳? India fought for Bangladesh's independence.
Wtf was bengal included in Pakistan in the first place bewildered me over such long distance between west and east.
Soon, the day will come when Somaliland will be a member of the family of nations.
I hope so, but it won't be easy.
Context?
And Taiwan too.
Good Bangladesh
Bangladesh is a rich military nation and holds a great position in world government and world family nations governments. The earlier Bangladesh national movements plays a great role in the rise of mankind and also the philosophy of truth and justice. The capitol of Bangladesh is Dhaka and its currency is bangladeshi taka.
☺️☺️
It should've been bengali rupees
@@Pikkinmink7 what a "2 takke ki soch" you have ! 😜😝😆🤣
@@zerinzinia8660 what does that mean
@@Pikkinmink7 I believe takka is Bengali for money. And in India the rupees is called Takka in its state of Bengal (West Bengal). So its called what it should be.
Bangladesh just recently bought 100 Al Khalid tanks from Pakistan for Bangladesh army. We're brother's long live Bangladesh and Pakistan.
Bangladesh, what a miracle. Once again the anti independence forces are on the march. We the people of Bangladesh are with our leader Sheikh Hasina.
do this channel acept comuinty contrebution adding subtitles in other languages?
Certainly! What language are you thinking of? And do you have a particular video in mind?
@@JamesKerLindsay i added subtitles to montenegro vid
Bangladesh is not only country with a unique case. East Timor is also another troubled country which succeed from Indonesia and recognized from the former parent nation Indonesia as well, joining United Nations in year 2002.
Thanks. I made a video on East Timor. It is actually a very different case to Bangladesh. East Timor is a case of thwarted decolonisation. It had a right to independence, but was invaded and occupied by Indonesia. It was therefore never regarded by the world as Indonesian territory. So, it wasn’t a case of secession. Bangladesh was regarded as an integral part of Pakistan and so is a case of secession. I hope that clears it up. You might also take a look at my video on self-determination.
I always wanted to know what if the parent state wants to break away. Then what how would you solve it. And what makes one a parent state and one the infant state. Is there a criteria
Great question! Almost always it is a part of a country that wants to break away. There have been almost no cases where the majority of a country wants to leave the rest. One obvious example was Russia and the Soviet Union, but the USSR was in the process of collapsing and so it doesn’t quite fit.
The key thing is that the part that walks away is the one that has to apply for UN membership and get recognition. This means few countries want to do this. If things get so bad they would prefer to kick out the troublesome part than walk away. But this is actually incredibly rare. Indeed, there had been only one such case since 1945: Singapore, which was forced out of Malaysia. I actually hope to cover this in a future video. It is a fascinating story.
@@JamesKerLindsay yes thanks for the resppons it's very interesting to cover the rare cases of independence indeed.
I think Malaysia kicked out Singapore, but I might be wrong there. As far as I can recall it was because the Singaporean government party, the People's Action Party, was too popular and Malaysia wanted them gone.
The World with peace, unity and love,,, watching from berbera somaliland rep,,
Thank you Sir... Love from Bangladesh ❤
Good vid.
Thanks!
You're right, International community does not recognize Kosovo
I don't get it. What makes the secession unilateral if the central government accepted the move? And only 3 years after the fact? I understand that some 40 countries recognized independence of Bangladesh before Islamabad, but it became part of international community after the central government "accepted this reality". (Fifth permanent UNSC member recognition came after Islamabad's)
I don't even see it as unilateral move, 3 years is barely time enough for a country to choose it's course of action, am I the only one who sees it this way?
Fully agree with your thoughts. Thanks
@@hasanchoudhury5401 I'm from Serbia, Kosovo declared independence in 2008, after 14 years, with all the pressure from the west and the EU, majority partner of foreign trade, we are still VERY far from social consensus, any sort of long term plan for the resolution of this problem.
So, what I said, I said having in mind situation in my country. Though, it is simpler, in case of Serbia, it's essentially Albanian irredentism trying to expand into Serbia, not some new stateless people who want their right to self-determination. Regardless, even if the plan was to grant them secession (simplest solution) - Serbia doesn't even have its list of conditions.
@@m1k4c If you see it correctly, the West had done something similar even in Serbia. If you observe news, there had been a disproportionate coverage against Serbia so that a narrative to separate Kosovo is built. Only reason why Europe still doesn't really follow through is because Albania is itself not willing to commit soldiers for take over of Kosovo (or help them militarily). Adding to the fact that despite their hatred for Serbia (& Russia), many among their (rest of Europe) own population are themselves against supporting the secession of an Islamic region from a Christian country. This is not such a clear cut case as in Bangladesh (both Pak and BD are Muslim).
@@sriharshacv7760 Kosovo is already Albanian, there's no need for Albania to "take over". At least no need to waste blood in taking it over, they always believed in demographic "victory", and they achieved it, by having 8 kids per family in average when Serbs living in the same province went below 2.1 threshold.
For the better part of Europe, it's already a done deal, there's nothing to "follow through" about it. 5 EU countries don't recognize Kosovo, but you can't really expect Cyprus (or Greece) to recognize it before Belgrade does. That doesn't stop Greece from establishing an office for cooperation, which is just a different temporary name for an embassy.
Yes, they bombed Serbia to "prevent genocide", when the bombing started, after few days NATO spokesman J.Shai said it's to "stop the genocide", several years after the war ended the figures were published in "Kosovo book of memory" - 2.000 dead in two years of terrorist insurgency before the bombing started (almost no civilians) and 11.500 in 78 days, after the bombing started. Ofc, this doesn't stop some German ambassadors and similar crap to continue blabing about their humanitarian, noble intervention.
So, yes, propaganda is always there. Truth is the first casualty of every war. There's a reason why they bombed our national tv infrastructure every day. And head building. It's the same with this war we have today - they banned Russia today and Sputnik the same day Russia invaded. As if Ukraine is the first war after the WW1.
Today, a new initiative with some "new framework" for the "dialogue" is active, just one more attempt to force Belgrade to recognize secession while offering vague nothing in return, this is something that's been going on for the last 23 years, so you don't have to tell me how the Political West functions. As all the countries of the global South - we know. (don't look at the map, Serbia IS global south after the 90s) So, I am SURE that Islamabad was pressured to recognize secession and probably be thankful afterwards, I am well aware how this thing works.
I remind you, Serbia was under very harsh sanctions for 8 years because it tried to preserve Yugoslavia and, even today it's under NATO control. We can't buy weapons wherever we want from, we can't buy oil from Russia, soon we won't be able to buy gas either, western diplomats are behaving like colonial administrators here. And - to spare you an essay or a book I could write about all forms of pressure, arm-twisting, blackmails and humiliation we are forced to live with - my point was very simple - BELGRADE STILL DID NOT RECOGNIZE KOSOVO.
I am aware that Islamabad was forced to accept this, I wouldn't doubt it even if I knew nothing about it, on top of my people's collective experience, I am a historian, so - I DO KNOW. The thing is - even after 23 years of relative isolation and remembering 8 years of "bread-lines" before that, I can't imagine what sort of pressure would they have to apply (perhaps bomb us again) to force Belgrade to do it.
Islamabad did it - after only few years. I am not saying that one is good and the other bad, it's just that Islamabad went through with it. So, there are no obstacles for full recognition and UN membership. And few years isn't really that long. I really don't see anything special about it. Secessions are often one-sided and the terms of secession are often negotiated with the central government after the fact. "Often" - relating to colonies and pre-ww1 secessions, today we don't have them so often. So I really don't see anything that controversial about Bangladesh case.
Was it Pakistans fault or was Pakistan doomed from the start because distance?
I think it was probably both. The distance was a key factor, but so was the fact that West Pakistan clearly saw East Pakistan as a lesser part of the state in all sorts of different ways.
I am from bangladesh.I think it was doomed to fail cause the both parts of the country were 1500 miles away.
@@itsdizznuts6217 as a Bangladeshi, it seems like the distance was the only reason from your point of view.
From my freedom father I heard current Pakistan used properties of Bangladesh to just only develop Pakistan(when both Pakistan Bangladesh were one country)..but not developed Bangladesh(intentionally pakistan ignored this)..they killed intentionally Bangladesh's more power people (like Doctor,teacher etc) during war so that Bangladesh never stand ..but fortunately it doesn't work ..Bangladesh stand back although they lost many reputed peoples.
I don't hate Pakistanis or Pakistan. If read and watch the news archives from that time.
You will see West Pakistan was draining capital and military from East Pakistan.
West Pakistan tried force Bengali businessman to open business in West Pakistan, also tried to force the scientist, doctors, engineers and teacher to go to West Pakistan and speak Urdu too, which had lead to the break up between the territories with the influence from US, European and middle eastern nations behind West Pakistan.
The corruption came from West Pakistan.
The Awami League wanted to operate with thier own government because of this corruption, exploitation and to leave East Pakistan defenceless. This was after Bongo bondhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman kept on going back and forth to West Pakistan to come up with an agreement that is good for both terrorise.
West Pakistan started a cowardly attack on it's own people in East Pakistan. Everyone seen the separation coming because of the corruption from West Pakistan away before the genocide in Bangladesh. Which massacre was aim at killing the Bengali intellects.
This corruption still continues in Pakistan by the same people with the Balochistanis.
And if you look at Bangladesh freed from the corruption in Pakistan it is doing very well to come out of poverty and develop it's national as Sheikh Mujibur Rahman planed it.
16th December 1971 when Yuri Bezmenov got promoted.
thanks sir
Imagine if every US state became independent
Thanks. That is a fascinating idea to ponder. Of course, there are already some separatist movements in the US, but they don’t seem to get much traction. But it is fascinating to think what sort of world we’d face if we woke up tomorrow and there was no more United Stare, but instead a number of other independent states. I do wonder if many would soon start looking for closer integration along the lines of the European Union. I suspect they would.
@@JamesKerLindsay the only state independence movement ik is calexit and if every state would split up there won't be a US i've seen a video of someone saying what if all states became independent but it was kinda clickbait since it only talked about texas and California
Very interesting thumbnail.
Fall of Dhaka after Bangladeshi Genocide.
Signing Surrender of Pakistan, 1971.
Good saying
Do make a video about the potential independence of nations controlled by the Indian Union.
??
@@subhadippaul4494 ??
It was Pakistan blunder to attack Indian Airforce basses, which lead to a Indo-Pak war a world record surrender by Niazi.
There is a massive chance that this video gets downvoted considering you mentioned at 4:34 that India's military involvement had a decisive effect on the creation of an independent Bangladesh. In recent times (since past 20y or so), there is a huge political trend in Bangladesh where they are attempting to minimize India's role in the attainment of Bangladesh's freedom. It is sad but that where things stand in 2022.
I want to meet you and talk with you? If there is a way!!
thanks Bangladesh
1) Borders were just plain unfair
2) Hurricane tht killed over 100k lives and still govt in western Pakistan didnt provide much aid
3) Overall discrimination, repulsive treatment and maddening 2 province system (yes east and west Pakistan thts all)
4) Indian involvement in arming mukti clan and then direct intervention
5) Pakistan army was not as strong as today in its conventional weapons let alone nuclear weapons it has today
@ব খ তী য়া র ফ য় সা ল [BAN] 😅
What about North and South Korea. Haven't they broken away from each other?
So Bangladesh is not the only country that broke away as territory?
Also you have Somalia and SamaliLand?
I can also think of other countries in a similar situation as Bangladesh.
Nope north korea south korea isnt your case
@@byron-ih2ge why do you say that?
@@badrulhussain5545 because they didnt do secession what happened there was a partition of a same group of people due to artificial ideologies( in this case communism and capitalism) . It is like the partition of india where india's muslim Majority regions broke away to create pakistan .( the ideology of islamic supremacy was the cause in this case)
@@badrulhussain5545 many have tried but they dont suceed , somalia-somaliland and sudan-south sudan r more such examples but they cant be termed a sucess
Isn't it the opposite for the Koreas? They are separated but both claim governance of the entire Korea.
The irony is there was actually a vote for secession, which won!
If india doesn't support and help Bangladesh then what would happened
Great question. I suspect that it could have become a de facto state. India would probably have supported it, and with Pakistan so far away and unable to assert control it may have existed in some sort of legal limbo. Widely accepted, but not a member of the United Nations.
@@JamesKerLindsay before Bangladesh became free,U can say both east and west pakistan infiltrate and war in1947-48,65 against india so why India helped them rather than let it be.bcz Bangladesh hates indian only bcz of the religion.so sad india fought against pak gor the peace of bangla and also stop us and uk to come against it.and indian army sacrifice life for them. Although bangla says it's not indian it's their only mukti bahini sena fought for the bangla
@@saanvi5660 firstly how can you be comparing the lives of only 12 thousand indian soldiers who died compared to 3 freaking million east pakistanis who fought and endured for 9 months and lost their lives to become bangladesh? were indians dying by the millions? nope. it was east pakistanis/ bengalis, never forget that and secondly, if india is so mighty why didn't they not help right at the start of operation searchlight when the punjabi west pak military started their slaughter? why did they wait for 9 months and only enter the east when the indian bases were attacked? that is very sus and it seems like india was only looking out for their own interest when they helped us, it was not a selfless act of heroism like most indians claim. but i am grateful to india that they did come in and defeat pak army but i find it pathetic how majority of the indians like to take full credit for what happened back then. it's like russian military taking full credit for any victories they enjoy in ukraine when in reality it was the separatist forces lpr and dpr doing the fighting for the last 8 years, not the russian military.
I came early in April 1971 from the USA with a special visa from the NY Indian Embassy on my Pakistani passport, to join the Mukti Bahini as a doctor and was in the sector 2 !
I met some of Mukti Bahini and Bangladeshi government personnel as well as Indian officials ! The impression I got was that initially India was happy to see that the enemy was breaking apart.
Very high officials and generals came to Agartala very early ( April May June ) to assess the ground level enthusiasm and reality of the youths because there were some hesitancy about the levels of commitments of the insurgents.
They could see that the rebel military officers and the politicians had no choice but to defend their own lives.
But we the volunteers were there on our own enthusiasm.
It is my understanding from what I have read that the top Indian generals wanted to wait for the dry season and avoid the rainy monsoon season.
Also they wanted to prepare well with full forces all set to their best !
@@AntiDegenerate1971 pakistan isn't only India's enemy China is bigger treat to India so India had to make sure Chinese nor the US will intervene also idia waited for snowfalls in himalayas that makes Chinese troops deployment hard. Pakistan at that time was powerful no matter how hard Bangladesh freedom fighters would have fought without India Bangladesh would never been independent
Aceh turki
Try to show proper map of INDIA 🇮🇳
The map is incorrect
No one cares lol
@Rejaul Karim Yea... Indians get triggered if someone accidentally shows their holy map wrong
The video was interesting, but there are few interpretations that are completely incorrect.
The number of refugees of almost 10 million is an Indian figure and should not be accepted at face value, it was repeated by everyone because in those days there weren't sufficient resources for independent verification. Refugees do not return to their home countries overnight, even after a conflict has finished, it takes years, even then it's a hard push.
Look at the population figures of Bangladesh, there's hardly a glitch. Plus in a conflict birth rate also goes down, such influences are not reflected in Bangladeshi population figures.
Correct interpretation is important otherwise it amounts to repeating lies.
Secondly, there was no partition of India, because India has never existed as a country nor a nation in history. If the term partition must be used, then it's proper and factually correct to say British India. It was the colony of British India that was partitioned, not India, there's a factual difference. It needs to be recognised, otherwise, again it amounts to repeating lies.
Another important factor was that India signed a treaty of friendship with the Soviets just months before attacking Pakistan, this was done in collusion with the Soviets, and indira Gandhi went on a tour of World capitals just months before attacking, obviously in order to judge the acceptability of such an attack. Naked state backed terrorism aspect has been ignored in your evaluation.
This is not to ignore the genuine issue's that you've already covered.
You always miss out the most important factors.
East Pakistan was main source of income for West Pakistan while West Pakistan developed, East remained impoverished. Plus the Bengali language wasn't recognized as official.
Moreover, while just 2.5 years after Independence, India adopted a constitution and became a democratic republic, Pakistan's interim constitution of 1965 was nullified and country fell under military dictatorship. The dictator changed after 1965 war with India but the dictatorship remained. In 1970, the Election was held for the first time and the East Pakistani leader Sheikh Mujib-Ur-Rahman got the majority of the vote, but the military dictatorship didn't accept the public mendate. Mujib already wanted certain autonomy for East Pakistan which wasn't accepted by West Pakistan.
Finally in March 1971, Mujib declared independence, military cracked down heavily and mass rape and genocide started happening all over East Pakistan. Also a massive flood came in East in 1970 which killed thousands and displaced many more.
If you watch the BBC interview of then dictator Yahya Khan, he first said, flood came, people died, not my fault. Then, when more than 10 million of East Pakistanis came to India as refugees, Yahya again refused to acknowledge and simply said that they were Indians only in the refugee camps.
Meanwhile, US president Nixon and his secratery Henry Kissinger supported Pakistani dictatorship despite many still being killed. Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi travelled to nearly 80 countries to get the support and pressurize Pakistan and got only one support in the form of USSR. India also trained young Bengalis from the refugee camps and help in the creation of a guerrilla force called Mukti Bahini.
India prepared for months and in the final moments of the war, USSR helped veto a motion against India in UNSC. It was around 80 countries with support for Pakistan vs just USSR supporting India.
USA and Britain also dispatched their navies in support of Pakistan but decided not to engage with India in the fear of direct Soviet retaliation.
Finally, Pakistani general surrendered on 16th Dec 1971 in front of Gen Jagjit Singh Arora, joint leader of Indian and Bangladeshi forces and bangladesh was created.
There is a reason there is still a deep sentiment in Indian public regarding this event When India got opposed by 80 countries diplomatically and threated by western powers while supported by Soviets in this war. The Soviet support has later consequences, but it mattered at the time. India also used Mig-21s and other Soviet weapons in this war while West denied selling to India the key weapons.
And like in modern day Ukrain war, when West claims to be on the side of the morality, they forget how many times they have supported mass murderer dictators and regimes.
Also, interesting to note that China was the last major country to recognize Bangladesh in 1975.
"I always miss out the most important factors." Seems a bit strong. These are short introductory videos. They aren't meant to be the final word on any situation. Do any of these factors really change the points I made? East Pakistan wanted independence and felt aggrieved at their treatment by the West. That's all in the video. The precise detailed reasons that you explain just emphasise that. Perhaps be a little reasonable in your expectations?