6-POINT FORMULA-OUR RIGHT TO LIVE

by

SHEIKH MUJIBUR RAHMAN

 

I have placed before the country a 6-point programme as basic principles of a firm solution of the country's inter-wing political and economics problems. I expected and in fact was ready to welcome criticism. But instead of criticizing the programme and pointing out its defects, if there be any, a class of people has started hurling abuses at and ascribing disruptionist motive to me. Normally I would have ignored these vilifications, firstly because these abusive voices are too familiar, these grimacing faces are too well-known, and these sallying patterns are too old to deserve anything but such ignoration; secondly because I have no manner of doubt that my 6-point programme has truly reflected the mind and correctly represented the demands of fifty five million East Pakistanis of their right to live. Neither have I any doubt that all right-thinking patriotic elements of West Pakistan agree with me on these points. This has been amply demonstrated by the newspaper writings and reports, statements and speeches by all sections of the intelligentsia, students and workers. This country-wide tremendous support to the 6-point programme is spontaneous. It is spontaneous because these demands are no new points invented afresh by me or any individual, but are in reality long­standing demands of the people and pledges of their leaders awaiting fulfilment for decades.

 

This being the case, I am confident that the mischievous propaganda and motivated campaign carried on by the vested interests through their agents and protectors will fail to mislead our people. They will surely not forget that whenever in the past any demand was made by East Pakistanis, however small, simple and reasonable it might be, these beneficiaries and agents of vested interests kicked up the self-same dust by raising the well-known cries of 'Islam in danger ','disruption of Pakistan' and ` Sovereign Bengal' etc. It was the same set of people who discovered 'hidden hand of India' in our simplest demand for inclusion of Bengali as a State Language along with Urdu. These are the people who brazenly dubbed our Shere-e-Bangal as a traitor and incarcerated our beloved leader Suhrawardy on a fantastic charge of wrecking Pakistan with the help of foreign money. Nothing is too mean for them to achieve their selfish objective which is perpetuation of their exploitation of the people of East Pakistan. I know, our people is quite aware of these events not of very distant past.

 

But I also know that the mischief-making potentialities of these enemies of the people are inexhaustible; that their resources are unlimited; that they are a multi-colour variety of human species with sub-human conscience. It is this variety who will be found in large number in the camp of the ruling coterie in the name of unity, faith and discipline'; they will be found in larger number in the oppo­sition camp for the sake of 'Islam and democracy'. But wherever they may be, in whatever colour, under whichever garb, they actually belong to one and the same camp, that is, the camp of the enemies of the people. They are thus solidly united in their attitude of denial towards East Pakistan. So, naturally they will leave no stone unturned to achieve their objective as they have done in the past. Whenever it suited their purpose to think that the people of East Pakistan were secretly inclined towards communism, they turned the stone of American aid and assistance by signing military pacts to fight communism and thereby save East Pakistan from secessionist design engineered by the communists. If, on the other hand, it suited their convenience to imagine that East Pakistan was too much wedded to Western democracy and too much attached to U.S.A., they hastened to turn the stone of aid and assistance of communist China to save East Pakistan from falling a prey to dollar imperialism. So on this occasion also they will come to the field to fight 6-point programme just as they did to fight 21-point pro­gramme in the past. They have, in fact, already taken the field with varieties of weapons brandished by different heroes of numerous battle fields. The target is the same; it is the 6-point. Therefore, it is quite in the fitness of things that President Ayub, Choudhury Mohammad Ali and Moulana Maududi, outwardly three avowed mutual enemies, weilding their respective weapons from three antipodal horizons, are aiming poisoned arrows on the same target of the 6-point.

 

I, therefore, deem it my duty to issue this booklet as an explanatory note to the 6-point programme and fervently appeal to the democratic forces in general, and the Awami Leaguers in particular, to spread out in the country and carry the message of the 6-point to every hearth and home. Now that the 6-point programme has been formally adopted by the Awami League, it has undoubtedly become the national demand of the people, particularly the people of East Pakistan. I hope they will find this booklet useful in their confrontations with the agents of the vested interests who are likely to be lying in ambush everywhere.

 

Point 1

 

In this point I have recommended as follows:

 

The Constitution should provide for a Federation of Pakistan in its true sense on the basis of the Lahore Resolution, and Parliamentary form of Government with supremacy of Legislature directly elected on the basis of universal adult franchise.

It will be seen that this point consists in the following seven ingredients, viz: (a) Pakistan shall be a Federation, (b) it shall be based on Lahore Resolution, (c) its Government shall be of Parliamentary form, (d) it must be responsible to the Legislature, (e) the Legislature must be supreme, (f) it must be directly elected and (g) election must be on the basis of universal adult franchise.

 

Let the opponents of 6-point programme speak out. Which of these seven ingredients are they opposed to? Let the people know who are federalists and who are unitarists. Those who are unitarists are definitely against Lahore Resolution. Conversely, those who are opposed to Lahore Resolution are definitely unitarists. So let it be decided once for all who own and who do not own the Lahore Resolution by which Pakistan was created and is rightly called the Pakistan Resolution. The people who disown Lahore Resolution disown Pakistan itself. It is evidently those people who did not raise their little finger in the struggle for Pakistan but subsequently jumped on it to grab power after it was created with the blood and of the people. These opportunists and job-hunters cannot naturally have any for or attachment to the sanctity of such an historic Resolution which about a revolution in the sub-continent and created Pakistan. Even those who swear by the Pakistan Resolution, there are some pseudo-federalists, They pay lip-service to the Lahore Resolution but disregard it by speaking against the very fundamental principle of Federation and by introducing extra-political controversies. This confusion has been further confounded by the power that be by forcible addition of political aberrations like basically controlled democracy. It was against such future personal likes and dislikes, whims and caprices, hunger and thirst for power of individuals, that the Lahore Resolution was pledged as a guarantee by the creators of Pakistan under the able guidance of Qaid-i-Azam. It will be sheer political dishonesty to deviate from Lahore Resolution after Pakistan was created by people's votes obtained on the basis of that Resolution. If it is now found necessary to so deviate for the sake of stability and integrity of Pakistan itself, the people will certainly agree to such changes or even complete reversal. But in any event it is the people who will decide and not any body else. As far as the people of East Pakistan are concerned they in the 1954 general election overwhelmingly voted for a constitution based on the Lahore Resolution. If, however, any body has any doubt about their present attitude due to lapse of long twelve years, we are prepared to face another referendum on the issue. Until that is done by a specific referendum on universal adult suffrage the Lahore Resolution and all its corollaries remain the Magna Carta of the people of Pakistan, and the rulers and the leaders are bound to give them a Constitution based on the Resolution.

 

Point 2

 

This point recommends as follows:

 

Federal Government shall deal with only two subjects, viz: Defence and Foreign Affairs, and all other residuary subjects shall vest in the Federating States,

 

Let us dispassionately discuss whether a two-subject Centre will bel sufficiently strong to be a respectable Federation. It should be borne in mind that what makes a Federation strong is not heaps of subjects under it. A Federation becomes strong by the loyalty and affection in which it is held by the people in peace and the allegience they owe and obedience they show it in war. The happy and strong people represented through efficient and strong units that make the Federa­tion, are the real source of its strength irrespective of the number of subjects dealt with by it. Indeed, a State which serves the base rather than the apex is really the strongest. It is now an well established principle of political science that decentralization rather than centralization makes the work of a State efficient both in the administrative and in the developmental spheres. It is also a well recognised principle of Federation that only those subjects should be in the Federal list which can be jointly managed more efficiently and profitably. It is the same principle that is underlying the system of Local Self-Government like District Councils and Municipalities. The very concept of Federation is based on the maxim of unity in diversity and union without ovar-centralization.

 

It was on this principle that in 1946 the Cabinet Mission proposed an Indian Federation with only three subjects, viz: Defence, Foreign Affairs and Communi­cation. Both the Congress and the Muslim League accepted the Cabinet Plan. The fact that ultimately it did not materialize due to a hitch elsewhere is a different matter and quite irrelevant to the issue now before us. Now, the British Government by proposing the Plan and the Congress and the Muslim League by accepting it have all demonstrated their agreement on the feasibility of a Federation with only three subjects. The only difference between the Cabinet Plan and my proposal is that I have given two subjects instead of three given in the Cabinet Plan. Even that difference is only apparent and not real as will be seen in my explanation to the Point 3 given later on. That explanation will show that I too have given three subjects to the Centre and not two. Only I have recommended Currency in place of Communication as had been earlier done in the famous 21-point programme. I have omitted Communication for obvious reasons. The basic principle on which subjects are handed over to a Federation, as has been said earlier, is the oneness and indivisibility of the interest of the federating units in the subjects concerned. In the case of an undivided Indian Federation, Communication was really such a subject. In it, al? the federating units would have been commonly interested and could have been more efficiently and profitably run if jointly managed by the Federation. An unbroken railway line and a non-stop through railway train could have run from Khybar to Chittagong. This would have been so because of the geographical contiguity. Not so Pakistan. Pakistan being comprised of two geo­graphical units separated by over a thousand miles of foreign territory, cannot possibly have any unbroken line of communication between the two wings. The two wings being themselves two compact geographical areas, must have their own system of communication separately organized and managed. It can, therefore, never be a Federal subject. By transferring the railways to the Provinces though after prolonged procrastination the present regime has reluctantly admitted the hard fact of geography. The same will have to be done also in the case of Post and Telegraphs and all other branches of communication.

 

In this connection another point need be clarified. Here I have recommended designation of the federating units as ` states ' instead of ` provinces ' as is now done. This very mention of the word 'state ' is liable to be mischievously mis­interpreted by the unitarist and pseudo-federalists. They will tell the unwary public: " Look, Mujib is wanting independent States ". This would be viciously wrong. Everywhere in different Federations of the world federating units are called 'states' and not 'provinces '. U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Federal Germany, Federa­tion of Malaysia, and last of all our neighbour India, all have designated their units as ` states ' instead of ` provinces '. Our next door neighbours like West Bengal and Assam are ` states ' of Indian Union and not 'provinces '. That designation of Indian provinces has not rendered their Union loose or their Central Government weak. If Assam and West Bengal can have the dignity and honour of being called `states' without impairing the solidarity of Bharati Union, why can't we have the same dignity and honour without impairing the solidarity of Pakistan Federation? Why are our rulers so allergic to our dignity?

 

Point 3

 

In this point, I have recommended either of the following two measures with regard to our Currency, viz:

 

A. Two separate but freely convertible currencies for two wings may be introduced, or

 

B. One currency for the whole country may be maintained. 1n this case, effective constitutional provisions are to be made to stop flight of capital from East to West Pakistan. Separate Banking Reserve is to be made and separate fiscal and monetary policy to be adopted for East Pakistan.

 

From the above it will be seen that I have not recommended the straightway taking of Currency out of the Federal list. If my recommendation contained in B above is accepted, Currency remains a Central subject. In this case, the only difference is that I have recommended the creation of separate Reserve Banks for two wings in a Federal Reserve System as obtains in U.S.A. According to this arrangement, the State Bank of Pakistan will have two Reserve Banks for two wings. The currency for East Pakistan shall be issued through the East Pakistan Reserve Bank and shall be marked 'East Pakistan' or simply 'Dacca'. Similarly, West Pakistan currency shall be issued through West Pakistan Reserve Bank and shall be marked 'West Pakistan' or simply 'Lahore'.

 

This is the only way by which we can save East Pakistan from sure economic ruination by effectively stopping flight of capital from this wing to the other. The geographical separateness has made the two wings ipso facto two economic units. An economic convulsion, either for the better or for the worse, in one wing has no corresponding convulsion in the other wing. So progress and development in the one does not in the least benefit the other. These economic incidents are quite independent of each other in the two wings. Expenditure in one cannot create employment in the other. This economic independence and separateness of the two wings is correctly reflected in their respective price and wage structures including the price of gold. This is what is known as the absence of mobility of labour and capital. This immobility of capital, however, does not prevent flight of capital. This is how it happens under the present dispensation:

 

We are supposed to belong to one indivisible economy. We have one currency. There is no distinguishing mark to show the currency circulation wingwise. We are under only one Finance Ministry situated in and operating from West Pakistan presided over always by a West Pakistani Minister formulating financial, fiscal and monetary policies through one single Central Bank, that is, the State Bank of Pakistan, also located in West Pakistan, issuing money minted, coined and printed in West Pakistan. This money after travelling and meandering in circulation throughout the country journeys back to and rests in accumulation in West Pakistan. Along with the head office of the Government Central Bank the head offices of all the joint-stock Banks, except one or two small ones of very recent origin, are also located in West Pakistan. The seat of the Government being located in West Pakistan, head offices of the three Armed Forces, all Foreign Missions and almost all foreign and national trades and industries organizations are situated in that wing. As a result, all money transactions done in East Pakistan are instantaneously transferred to West Pakistan. All share money of joint-stock companies, all deposits of Banks, their security money, all Govern­ment reserves, all earnings, profits and savings of trade and industry operating in East Pakistan move in a matter of seconds to West Pakistan. Any one conversant with banking operation knows well that only barely ten per cent of the entire deposit need be kept ready for payment and the rest can be and generally is invested. Savings when invested become capital. This investment is naturally done in West Pakistan as West Pakistan's capital. This is how capital formation in West Pakistan has been so rapid. This again is how there has been total absence of capital formation in East Pakistan. As investment means employment, this incident has meant the employment in West Pakistan only. As capital formation is followed by rapid industrialization, this has meant industrialization of West Pakistan alone. This process will continue unless and until the prevailing one-way traffic of finance is effectively checked by stopping this flight of capital. This can be done and capital investment can be generated in East Pakistan only by creating a Reserve Bank for East Pakistan as suggested by me. It is the only way to save East Pakistan from economic extinction. This reform in our currency system while saving East Pakistan from economic collapse will keep currency a Central subject as a symbol of our unity and oneness.

 

If, however, our West Pakistani brothers think otherwise, then my other alternative may be adopted. Under that arrangement Currency will, no doubt, be a provincial subject, but that will not weaken our Centre. Neither will it affect the oneness of Pakistan. For even then we can have the same currency symbol by mutual discussion and agreement. And for the other, a federation can effectively work and be strong and stable without Currency as its subject. The Cabinet Mission recommended an Indian Federal Centre without Currency in the Federal list. Had it been thought unworkable, British Government would not have re­commended it, nor would the Congress and the Muslim League have accepted it.

 

Point 4

 

In this point, I have recommended that the power of taxation and revenue collection shall vest in the federating units and that the Federal Centre will have no such power. The Federation will have a share in the state taxes for meeting their required expenditure. The Consolidated Federal Fund shall come out of a levy of certain percentage of all state taxes.

 

It is this proposal that seems to have most annoyed the unitarists and pseudo­federalists. They are making a lot of noises and kicking up dust of confusion such as distintegration and disruption. These are old bogeys and shibboleths used by the vested interests against all reforms in all ages. They need not worry any Pakistani. The fact is that a strong Federation can successfully work and is actually working without the power of taxation. It makes the Federation rather stronger. This is so because taxation is a duty and necessity rather than a right and power. Levying taxes and collecting them is a responsibility and a botheration. It is just like manually earning one's own livelihood. In our daily life we find people wanting to better employ themselves in finer and nobler work, lease out their properties to others at fixed rent leaving to them the arduous task of collecting small amounts from individual tenants and earning petty sums from day-to-day transactions. ' The monarchs of the past used to, and land-lords of the present do, lease out their realms in ijara for tax collection. The Central authorities in all ages have tried to be spared the botheration of tax collection for their own maintenance. It is only the banya mentality of the present day rulers that impels them to handle all money matters themselves. A little reflection will show that the right and power concerned do not rest in the act of tax collection but in the money so collected. If a Central Government is constitutionally assured of the required amount, why should it bother about the actual collection? In the case of a Federation it is only the fiscal taxation in which it is interested. The rest of the purposes of taxation, viz: protective, social, commercial and moral, are the responsibility of the federating units. This is what is done in U.S.A. and some other Federations. In the U.S.S.R. even the fiscal taxation is not done by the Union. There is no Finance Minister and Finance Ministry in the Union Govern­ment of the Soviet Union. The Finance Ministries and Ministers are all with the Federating Republics. They meet the requirements and serve the purposes of the Union Government. Have these arrangements weakened the Central authorities of U.S.A, and U.S.S.R.? It was with this knowledge and experience of the working of a Federation that Cabinet Mission offered an Indian Federation without the power of taxation and it was for the same reason that the Congress and the Muslim League accepted the offer. It will, therefore, be seen that a Federation can be firmly provided with its fiscal finances without being burdened with the duty of tax collection. My proposal is precisely to this effect. According to my recommendation, the Constitution will provide that a certain percentage of the Revenue collections on all heads shall automatically be credited to the Federal Fund by the Reserve Banks, on which amount the unit Governments shall have no control. Constitutional provisions may also be made empowering the Federation to raise funds to meet the increased Defence expenditure at the time of war including expansion of Federal jurisdiction in such emergencies. It is, therefore, sheer bunkum to call the autonomists the disruptors of Pakistan. On the contrary, relieving the Federation of the burden of tax collection will have, the following salutary effect, viz:

 

(a) the Federation will have more time to devote in matters of Defence and External Relations and to act as a unifying force;

 

(b) wastage due to overlapping, duplication and litigation etc. will be saved and money thus saved and officials thus relieved will be available for better and nobler utilization;

 

(c) the tax and revenue collection will be cheaper and easier;

 

(d) economy of having a single authority for tax collection will have been achieved;

 

(e) it will pave the way for introducing and adopting the most modern taxation method, viz. single taxation.

 

Point 5

 

In this point, I have recommended that:

 

(1) there shall be two separate accounts for foreign exchange earnings of the two wings,

 

(2) earnings of East Pakistan shall be under the control of East Pakistan Govern­ment and that of West Pakistan under the control of West Pakistan Government,

 

(3) foreign exchange requirement of the Federal Government shall be met by the two wings either equally or in a ratio to be fixed,

 

(4) indigenous products shall move free of duty between two wings,

 

(5) the Constitution shall empower the unit Governments to establish trade and commercial relations with, set up trade missions in and enter into agreements with foreign countries.

 

Now, a panoramic glance at the economic history of Pakistan since its creation will show the following consistent incidents:

 

(a) East Pakistan has earned bulk of the annual foreign exchange of Pakistan.

 

(b) East Pakistan's earnings have been spent in West Pakistan in industrializing that wing and earnings from those industries have been reinvested in West Pakistan as the earnings of that wing.

 

(c) East Pakistan's earnings are not being spent in East Pakistan on the plea of its inability to absorb them due to absence of capital formation.

 

(d) Import to East Pakistan is less than her export, whereas import to West Pakistan is more than her export.

 

(e) Two thirds of Pakistan's foreign exchange is earned by jute; but that earning is utilized neither for the benefit of the jute-growers nor for East Pakistan.

 

(f) Almost all foreign aids and loans are secured against foreign exchange earned by East Pakistan; but they are spent in West Pakistan on the same plea of non-absorbing capacity of East Pakistan. The irony is that interest on these loans and their instalments are being borne by East Pakistan.

 

Now, the cumulative effects of these economic incidents, all of which are artificial, are the following consequences, viz.

 

(i) East Pakistan has not been industrialized sufficiently,

 

(ii) the little industrialization that has been done has been done by West Pakistanis or by people other than East Pakistanis with all the characteristics of foreign investments both in the matter of employment and profit earning,

 

(iii) there is chrnoic inflation causing soaring high prices of commodities with all its concomitants like blackmarketing and profiteering bringing untold miseries to the life of the people.  

 

(iv) jute-growers are not only not getting fair economic price of their produce but even the cost of production is denied to them resulting in their perpetual indebtedness and progressive impoverishment.

 

These are man-made iniquities and are, therefore, remediable. The obvious remedies are, firstly, to industrialize East Pakistan to produce wealth among and provide employ­ment for East Pakistanis; secondly, to check inflation by equalizing import and export and thereby supplying commodities to the people at reasonable prices; thirdly, to nationalize jute trade and thereby give fair price to the growers and ensure the state's earnings in foreign exchange. It was with this last object in view that Awami League Government set up Jute Marketing Corporation in 1957. It was subsequently reduced to nothing by the vested interests with the help of the Central Government.

 

Each and every one of these steps presupposes acceptance of the above proposals recommended by me.

 

Point 6

 

In this point, I have recommended setting up of a militia or a para-military force for East Pakistan. This is neither unreasonable nor new. We had pledged in the famous 21-point programme in 1954 that we would give arms and uniforms to our Ansars.

Neither is the proposal unprecedented and impracticable. There are instances where such para-military territorial forces are maintained in Outlying regions. We ourselves had one such regiment from before Independence. It was the Eastern Rifles. After Pakistan, it became East Pakistan Rifles. The present regime has taken this away from the hand of East Pakistan Government.

 

East Pakistan is the home of the majority of Pakistanis. To defend it is the political obligation as well as moral duty of the Government of Pakistan. Why then should it be necessary for East Pakistanis to demand it? Why do they not do it on their own initiative? How and with what conscience do they say that defence of East Pakistan lies in West Pakistan? Does it not tantamount to saying that the mouth, the belly and the stomach of East Pakistan lie in West Pakistan? How will the arms, ammunitions and wealth in West Pakistan help East Pakistan when transport between the wings can be snapped in a matter of seconds? Has not the recent 17-days war proved our utter helplessness? How can one brag that some event in Warsaw saved East Pakistan? It is the defence policy of our Government that has reduced us to this position. lnspite of all this we want a united Defence of the country and to retain it as a Central subject. But at the same time we want that East Pakistan be made self-sufficient in the matter of Defence; that an Ordnance Factory, a Military Academy and the Navy Headquarter must be set up in East Pakistan. These things were actually demanded in 1954. Nothing, however, has been done in the course of long twelve years. We do not yet know when these will be done.

 

So in the meantime we want to make our own Defence arrangement in a small way with unsophisticated weapons suited to our own field craft within easy reach of our limi­ted resources. What is the objection? Where does it lie? It is not easy to comprehend. Neither is it easy to understand why a Fund separately raised for East Pakistan war pur­poses is promptly taken over by the Centre.

 

AN APPEAL

 

Now, before concluding, I want to submit a few words to my West Pakistani brethren:

 

Firstly, they should not run away with the idea that whatever 1 have stated above I have done in the interest of East Pakistan only. It is not so. In each of my 6-point programme is inherent a corresponding benefit to my West Pakistani bretheren. They are sure to derive equal benefit out of their implementation.

 

Secondly, when I speak of East Pakistan's wealth being flown to and concentrated in West Pakistan I on y mean regional concentration. I do not, thereby, mean that this

wealth has reached the masses of West Pakistan. No, I do not and cannot mean that. I know there are millions like us in West Pakistan who also are unfortunate victims of this economic exploitation. I also know that the entire wealth of the country is concentrated in the hands of a few families. This will continue till the capitalistic pattern of our society is not changed. But before that, this regional exploitation must cease. I, however, do not blame West Pakistanis for this regional exploitation.

 

Thirdly, it is the geographical situation and the unnatural system that is being pur­sued which are responsible for this injustice. Take only one instance:

 

Had the Capital of Pakistan been located in East Pakistan instead of West Pakistan this regional exploitation would have occurred in the reverse way. 62Y. of our Revenue that is being spent on our Defence forces, and 32Y. of our Revenue that is being spent on our Central Administration would have all been spent in East Pakistan instead of West Pakistan. The well-known Public Finance maxim that "the expenditure of the Govern­ment is the income of the people and the income of Government is the expenditure of the people" would have worked in favour of East Pakistan instead of West Pakistan. This 94% of our total Revenue which has been annually spent in West Pakistan, and thus formed the income of West Pakistan, would have in that case been spent in and enriched East Pakistan. The seat of the Government being in West Pakistan, all the three Headquarters of the Armed Forces and all Central institutions and Foreign Missions have got their head offices in West Pakistan as a matter of course. Consequently, all their spending are done in that wing. All these spendings would have been in East Pakistan had the seat of the Government been here. East Pakistan would have been enriched and West Pakistan impoverished to that extent and in that proportion.

 

In that event, you, the West Pakistanis, would have made the same demands for regional justice for which you are condemning us, the East Pakistanis, and ascribing all sorts of evil motives. In that case you would have realized that there was no other motive than the motive of self-preservation. In that context, when West Pakistanis would have made such demands of regional justice, do you know what would have been our attitude? We, East Pakistanis, would have straightway accepted your demands instead of calling you bad names like provincial, narrow-minded and disruptionist. We would have at once conceded that it was your right to demand justice and equality and it was your duty to do so. Nay, we would have gone further. We would not have waited for you to make these demands. Instead, we would have met your requirements before you would have demanded them. We really believe in justice, equality and fairplay amongst brothers. A State is nothing if not a big family. Even in a family, eating by one member noes not fill the stomach of another. So, how and with what conscience do you call us selfish for demanding our share? What will others call you who are not only enjoying your own share but devouring the share of your brothers also? We are, however, demanding our share only, not yours too. We want to live with you as equal partners, not exploiters.

 

Fourthly, if we happen to have more than enough, we can even sacrifice something for you from out of our share. We did so in the past. Do not you remember? Please recall :

 

(1) In the first Constituent Assembly we had 44 and you had 28 representatives. If we wanted we could most democratically have brought the Capital and Headquarters of the three Armed Forces to East Pakistan. We did not.

 

(2) Out of sheer brotherly feeling and sense of equality we elected 6 West Pakistanis to Constituent Assembly from East Pakistan by East Pakistani votes.

 

(3) By our majority we could have made Bengali our only State Language. We, however, demanded and got both Urdu and Bengali.

 

(4) By majority of votes we could have framed a Constitution favourable to East Pakistan.

 

(5) To remove any possible complex of domination we sacrificed our majority and accepted parity on your assurance that you would concede parity in all respects.

 

Fifthly, the above should be enough to convince West Pakistani brothers that we East Pakistanis are really consumed with a sense of brotherly equality towards you by which we want to live in honour and dignity. That we are capable of makingisacrifices for you, if you need it, has also been proved in the past. Had the Capital been in East Pakis­tan we would have on our own initiative set up a real Second Capital in West Pakistan, not merely a hoax of a Capital. We would never have taken advantage of that vantage position and would not have grabbed all the important offices ourselves. We would not have captured all the high and lucrative posts of West Pakistan like chairmanships of Cotton Board, P.I.D.C., Railway Board, P.C.S., Port Trust and WAPDA etc. We would not have thought of capturing the Governorship of your wing. On the contrary, we would have equitably distributed the high offices between the people of the two wings, we would have made effective arrangements for spending Central Revenues equitably bet­ween East and West Pakistan, we would have extended regional and provincial autonomy instead of curtailing them. We would never have allowed any disparity to grow between two wings either political, administrative or economic. We would never have done any­thing to create any feeling that because we East Pakistanis are in a majority, because the seat of the Government is here, we are, therefore, the masters of Pakistan. We would rather have done everything to make you feel that this country belongs to you as well as to us, both in thought and in action. We would have shared State powers equally with you.

 

We believe that this feeling of absolute equality, sense of inter-wing justice and impar­tiality is the very basis of Pakistani patriotism. Only he is fit to be a leader of Pakistan who is imbued with and consumed by such patriotism. A leader who sincrely believes that the two wings of Pakistan are really two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, two rows of teeth, two hands and two legs of the body-politic of Pakistan, a leader who feels that to make Pakistan healthy and strong one must make each one of these pairs equally healthy and storng, a leader who earnestly believes that to weaken any one of these limbs is to weaken Pakistan as a whole, a leader who zealously holds that any one who deliberately or knowingly weakens any limb of Pakistan is an enemy of the country and a leader who is ready to take strong measures against such enemies, is the only person entitled to claim the national leadership of Pakistan. Pakistan is a magnificent country with an uncom­monly wide horizon. To be fit to become its leader one must possess a similarly magni­ficent heart with an uncommon breadth of vision.

 

Sixthly, let me humbly remind my West Pakistani brothers and sisters that when we demanded Bengali to be made one of the two State Languages of Pakistan you condemned it as a move to undo Pakistan. When again we demanded joint electorate particularly in the context of parity in representation demanded by you, you condemned our demand to have been inspired from across the border. Both of these two demands have now been accepted; but there has been no undoing of Pakistan due to their acceptance. Does it not put you to shame that every bit of reasonable demand of East Pakistan has got to be secured from you at tremendous cost and after bitter struggle as if snatched from unwill­ing foreign rulers as a reluctant concession? Does it do you any credit? Please put a stop to such attitude once for all. Please be brothers instead of rulers.

 

In conclusion, I fervently appeal to my countrymen to deeply ponder over the formula put forward by me. They will find that none of the items in my 6-point programme is either unjust, impractical or disruptive of the country's integrity. I hope I have succeeded, in the short space of this booklet, in showing that the acceptance of these points will not only weaken Pakistan but will on the contrary make it stronger.

 

But the vested interests for obvious reasons will not agree. They have got their own way of judging things. To them, only the continuation and the perpetuation of their exploi-

tation mean stability of a Society and a State. To them, any body who disturbs or threa­tens to disturb this process of exploitation is a traitor and a disruptor. This is neither new nor surprising. Our great forebears like Fazlul Huq and Suhrawardy had to fall victims to such vitriolics. In taking up the cause of the exploited masses one must, there­fore, be ready and prepared for such vilifications and incarcerations. To my lot have fallen many such trials and tribulations in the past. Through the blessings of my superiors, comradeship of my colleagues and affectionate support of my countrymen, God in His infinite mercy gave me courage and fortitude enough to withstand those oppressions. With this boundless affection of my countrymen as my asset, I am fully prepared to make any sacrifice in their service. The life of any individual like myself is nothing compared to the salvation of the people of my country. I know of no nobler battle than to fight for the rights of the exploited millions. This is the lesson I have learnt at the feet of my political master Suhrawardy. He is no longer in our midst to guide us. But I am determined to live upto that lesson and keep his flag flying. The country is passing through the darkest hour of her life. At such a difficult time, Awami League Council has placed the heavy responsiblity of its Presidentship on my already overburdened shoulder. But through Allah's mercy I am no shirker. I am not afraid of work. So I have with all humility accepted the great responsibility. I have great faith in my people. I also know that the darkest hour of night is just a harbinger of dawn. My beloved countrymen wiii only pray to Allah so that He may continue to give me mental strength and physical fitness to devote the rest of my life in fighting for restoration of their rights which have been forcibly snatched away.

 

(Issued by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as President of the Awami League on March 23, 1966.)

 

 

 

Source: Bangladesh Documents, vol – I, p.23-33