MY last week's article about the stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh was met with numerous and conflicting reactions. I received a number of messages on my personal e-mail address. While some readers commented on the article in this newspaper's website. I did not want to go back to the same subject again this week, had it not been for some "unusual " messages and comments. Though, in general, most of the messages and comments were supportive of my viewpoint. The readers also thanked this newspaper for supporting the rights of the stranded Pakistanis. They believed that the Biharis (most of the stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh) were deprived of their citizenship and basic human rights just because they were attached to the homeland that they had chosen after the division of the Indian Subcontinent in 1947 and when Bangladesh was established following the dissecting of East Pakistan. The Biharis were dogmatic about the unity of Pakistan and stood strongly by the Pakistani Army against the separation. Therefore the new country (Bangladesh) in there eyes — "enemies and traitors". In this article, I will review some of the messages and comments of the readers that were sent after the last week's article. This may also prove to be an opportunity to shed more light on the plight of the stranded Pakistanis and help find a solution to their predicament. A reader sent me an email in which he said some Pakistani politicians have been dealing with the issue with double standards since the creation of Bangladesh. He said they repatriated a number of Bengalis, Baluchis, Pathans and Sindhis whom they considered to be the real "sons of the soil". He said these politicians did not consider the Biharis to be among the sons of the soil so they did not repatriate them to Pakistan. If this information is accurate, it will contradict the very causes behind the establishment of Pakistan. It will nullify the struggle and the sacrifices of Subcontinent Muslims under the leadership of the founding fathers. Pakistan was originally created to be a home for Muslims from the Subcontinent whether from the country itself or from the various other Indian states. One of the readers wrote a comment that was not only ambiguous but also uncouth. It does not deserve to be published in the first place, but I just wanted to make a point that such readers should not partake in such serious debates, if they want to be frivolous or plain unsavory. Another reader referred to a plan that was hatched to send the Biharis to the Middle East after 1971. He said Bhutto (the then president of Pakistan) sent Sindhis instead. I am not quite sure about the accuracy of this claim. However, I am quite certain that the Pakistan Repatriation Council (PRC) did come up with a plan to transport the qualified and skillful stranded Pakistanis to work in the Arab Gulf countries. Under the plan, the council would incur all the expenses of this operation. This plan is still valid and could be executed by the government of Pakistan. A commentator said the government of Bangladesh has been trying since independence to absorb the stranded Pakistanis despite its meager resources. I very much doubt the accuracy of this claim. I heard that the government has expressed its readiness to grant Bangladeshi nationality to those who were born after 1971 if they talked Bengali. How can they speak or learn this language while they are besieged in camps where they only talk Urdu? They are also committed to their Pakistani identity and their Urdu language. Another commentator denied the existence of stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh. He said there were about 320,000 Biharis in Bangladesh of whom 170,000 were repatriated to Pakistan and 150,000 granted Bangladeshi nationality. He referred to the Supreme Court in Dhaka as the source of this information. I do not know if what he said is correct or not but a number of commentators nullified his claim and said the problem of the stranded Pakistanis still exists and that they are still living in squalid camps which lack the basic necessities of life. The stranded Pakistanis do not even enjoy the privileges the refugees in camps usually have because they have not been kicked out from one country to another. I am not sure if this is the sole reason for depriving them of the rights of refugees and I do not think these are good reasons to deprive them of these rights. Concluding, I would like to thank all those who have supported or opposed my viewpoint. As for those who accused me of being ignorant of the history of Pakistan, I would like to tell them that I am very well versed on the issue of the stranded Pakistanis since I have been working in Dhaka. I also visited their camps when the government of Pakistan under the then President Zia ul-Haq was trying to cooperate with the Muslim World League (MWL) in Makkah to repatriate the stranded Pakistanis. President Zia promised to transport them to Pakistan even if he had to carry them on his back.
— Dr. Ali Al-Ghamdi is a former Saudi diplomat who specializes in Southeast Asian affairs. He can be reached at [email protected]
