Was creation of bangladesh a blunder?

screwterrorists

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
76
Likes
0
So one of the topics for the debate was:

Creation Of Bangladesh was a Blunder on Indias Part

Someone care to explain why???
East Pakistan would have been much more detrimental and Bangladesh saves so much hassle !

please explain.
 
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
24,555
Likes
21,081
Country flag
I think it is intended to mean that Bangladesh should have been absorbed into the Indian subcontinent rather than kept an independent country after liberation?
 

screwterrorists

Founding Member
Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
76
Likes
0
oh I see.

even so...anyone care to explain why?
with the population problems. with the independence seekers. is it smart to try to unite them and perhaps create another problem?
are the natural resources in bangladesh worth it? does it have some special strategic location that is irreplaceable?

=D
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
If BD would not have been created then today india would have been surrounded by nuke weapons from west east and north.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,322
Likes
11,624
Country flag
The question to ask is why within no time the Bangladeshis turned from being grateful to India turned inimical? why it provides sanctuary to terror organizations bent on carrying terror activities against India that too in cohorts with the very masters they fought hard to get independence.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
The question to ask is why within no time the Bangladeshis turned from being grateful to India turned inimical? why it provides sanctuary to terror organizations bent on carrying terror activities against India that too in cohorts with the very masters they fought hard to get independence.
simple answer is radicalization and the military takeover.Story of bangladesh is same as pakistan ie military take over which supported the islamic parties and even after the death of general/president zia-ur-rehman her wife from BNP party rampantly supported J-e-I and other islamic parties under her prime ministership.Other main thing was after military takeover indira gandhi neglected BD and relations went cold for almost 10 yrs.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,322
Likes
11,624
Country flag
But why target the very country that gave you independence?
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,312
Likes
8,374
Country flag
But why target the very country that gave you independence?
Fits in with the narrative. India is blamed for every and any ill and it makes sense because it can be so easily explained.
Tough for Bangladeshis (read intellectual bongs) to realize that they have screwed up and are no better independent than they would've have been under Punjabi rule.

PS: Not saying we are not responsible for some of the ills. We sure are but to blame India for everything is not fair.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
720
Fits in with the narrative. India is blamed for every and any ill and it makes sense because it can be so easily explained.
Tough for Bangladeshis (read intellectual bongs) to realize that they have screwed up and are no better independent than they would've have been under Punjabi rule.

PS: Not saying we are not responsible for some of the ills. We sure are but to blame India for everything is not fair.
What BD realize is that if they would 've been with pakistan atleast they would be nuke power and india would have been scared of it.:happy_2:
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,134
Likes
20,311
Country flag
If BD would not have been created then today india would have been surrounded by nuke weapons from west east and north.
How different is that from today? Well, BD doesn't have nukes, but it does manage to needle India now and then.

India had a very nice opportunity to absorb East Bengal in 1971, and the world would have forgiven/forgotten India for that annexation by now, as "nation-building".

The United States pieced itself together into what it is today over a period of 80 years (territory was added 80 years after its independence). So addition of territory to India some 24 years after independence would not have been seen as something abnormal at the time.



East Pakistan had to be neutralized, but absorbed as East Bengal, not Bangladesh. That was a blunder.
 
Last edited:

SHAILENDRA

New Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
6
Likes
0
no, it was not. firstly, it had to be separated sooner or later. then, a country's value at world panorama is determined by its geo-poli-fin position. a pak supported fin and mil by china with a huge military, nuke presence could be more dangerous then now. and think of north east states. Now, atleast we are in position of talking or taming BD..An east pak could be fatal for our ambitions in bay of bengal.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,322
Likes
11,624
Country flag
Taking forward from what Tarun said, it would be interesting to find out if the Govt of that time ever considered assimilating east pakistan into India or not?
If we had a Sardar in 71 would he not have kept the instrument of accession on the table in return for Indian help to east pakistanis?
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,134
Likes
20,311
Country flag
Taking forward from what Tarun said, it would be interesting to find out if the Govt of that time ever considered assimilating east pakistan into India or not?
If we had a Sardar in 71 would he not have kept the instrument of accession on the table in return for Indian help to east pakistanis?
Yes, Sardar would have gone to Decca with the Instrument, had it signed by Mujeeb, gotten it ratified by USSR, but before US or Chinese intervention.

I think the threat of foreign military intervention could have been the biggest factor that made Indian leaders decide against annexation of East Bengal, if they did consider annexation in the first place. Indira Gandhi may have just had the small window for neutralizing East Pakistan by creating a separate Bangladesh, and not annexation (giving Pakistan enough time to push the international community for intervention).
 
Last edited:

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,322
Likes
11,624
Country flag
The least india could have done was try to eke out a good chunk of Bangladesh to connect with our northeast.
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,134
Likes
20,311
Country flag
The least india could have done was try to eke out a good chunk of Bangladesh to connect with our northeast.
We would have had to pass right through. Connectivity wasn't the main concern, at the time Siliguri (the chicken-neck) was a real weak spot. Four years later, with the accession of Sikkim, that risk factor went down.
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,550
Creation of Bangladesh was an excellent strategic move by India. Pakistan is still bleeding from the cut it had.
Not annexing Bangladesh was another good move by then PM Indira Gandhi. We have Naxals, PDP, Hurriyat, NE militancy and a lot of other headaches to take care of, now think of BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami, had India annexed Bangladesh.

All in all a good move.
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,312
Likes
8,374
Country flag
East Pakistan had to be neutralized, but absorbed as East Bengal, not Bangladesh. That was a blunder.
What you wanted to absorb 15 crore piss poor people off a piss poor state who followed Islam and belive that Hindus are the bane of all their ills into an equally piss poor state experiencing famine, insurgencies, and riddled with Hindu-Muslim divide ?
 

Oracle

New Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
8,120
Likes
1,550
/\/\/\ Also, let's say for arguments sake, we did annex East Pakistan(now Bangladesh) as East Bengal. People then would have flooded the entire NE and demanded independence again from India, the area now being (East Pakistan + NE = Greater Bangladesh) Greater Bangladesh.
 
Last edited:

anoop_mig25

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,556
Likes
2,536
Country flag
simple answer is radicalization and the military takeover.Story of bangladesh is same as pakistan ie military take over which supported the islamic parties and even after the death of general/president zia-ur-rehman her wife from BNP party rampantly supported J-e-I and other islamic parties under her prime ministership.Other main thing was after military takeover indira gandhi neglected BD and relations went cold for almost 10 yrs.
my question is are smaller nations i mean to say in size are more prone to militarily takeovers to then those bigger , there are lots of state in south america/post-pre world war 1 European nations, Indian sub-continent

if yes then there is thread where is is argued that splitted Pakistan is better for india
i would like to ask won`t the nations carved out of Pakistan would be prone to militrarat take overs (i am sorry i am deviatating form bangladesh here).
if yes is n`t their faith would be same as bangladesh or may be worse ?

on Bangladesh India argued and supported independence of Bangladesh because it`s leader was not allowed to rule pre -1971 pakistan.
Indra Gandhi sized opportunity and splitted pakistan .

if india had tried to absorb Bangladesh into India then this would have mate US/CHINA/PAKISTAN stronger in their argument plus leader of mukti bani would had never supported indians

i think if we had absorb Bangladesh into india we might have been facing a problem similar to kashmir
 

Phenom

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
878
Likes
402
The economic cost would have been too big for India to absorb, Bangladesh was a war ravaged country and had little to offer in terms of economic benefit. Also there is a big possibility that some elements in BD would have resented Indian annexation and would have started a guerrilla war.

As others mentioned, whatever happened in 71 was a very good move by the Indian political class, especially the PM.
 

Global Defence

Articles

Top