Tale retold of a proud struggle

LANGUAGE Movement and the Making of Bangladesh is a fairly exhaustive treatment of the seminal event that triggered the eventual birth of sovereign independent Bangladesh:  the language movement.  Dr. Safar Ali Akanda's personal involvement in the right to establish the honour of the mother tongue of the Bengalis enables him to offer glimpses of his insight into a story that has been told by several writers.  The author of the book under review acknowledges these contributions throughout the text and in a useful bibliography, but has also set himself apart from much of those writings with his stated intent “to see the spirit of the movement as a life-force that was transmitted into subsequent protests and movements to give them a sense of purpose and direction until the victory was achieved in the war of liberation.”  Readers could conceivably have conflicting reactions to this claim, but, nonetheless, this is an engrossing book offering analytical insights into important events.
The precursor to Bangladesh's independence was the dishonour done to the cultural factor of its language.  The struggle for political and economic emancipation of the Bengalis took off, and snowballed, from the language movement, immortalized by the date of Ekushey February 1952.  Akanda says as much:  “The language movement…became the rallying point to shape a new Bengali nationalism that was a manifestation of a separate linguistic and cultural identity, with a spirit that inspired the entire population for a liberation war that culminated in the emergence of Bangladesh as an independent state….”  He rehashes the familiar story (to most Bengalis) of Jinnah's declaration in Dhaka in March 1948 that Urdu would be Pakistan's state language, the refusal of the ruling caucus of the Muslim League (ML) to accede to the “just and reasonable demand for Bengali to be given the status of one of the state languages”, and the resulting protests that culminated in the events of 21 February 1952.  The die had been cast, and there was no turning back from the demand for the restoration of the honour of the Bengali language.
Akanda starts off with a succinct, but interesting, discussion on the impact of culture on the growth of nationalism, regionalism, and separatism.  It does not always succeed in carving out a separate sovereign entity, as the cases of Quebec in Canada or Biafra in Nigeria attest to, but, as with those instances, enable the nationalists to garner substantial concessions that they might otherwise have not been able to.  In Quebec's case, the issue of language featured prominently as both a reason for separatism and a demand for equal recognition with English that was granted.  The author underlines the importance of culture to a nation and its identity:  “A culture, whether rich or poor, is very much dear to its own people.  If it is recognized to be rich and resourceful, then that culture becomes one of the proudest possessions of the people who are identified with it.”  An interesting observation made by Cyril Dunn in The Sunday Observer (London) in 1969 prognosticating the imminent demise of Pakistan, partly by contrasting the cultural and ethnic patterns of the people of East and West Pakistan, and quoted by the author, is worthy of a mention:  “The people of the West are solid farmers and vigorous, even blood-thirsty frontiersmen.  The Bengalis in the East are garrulous and sensitive, swinging rapidly from elation to despondency.”  Touché!  A distinct contrast in character traits that the commonality of religion could not quite bridge over.  Especially when one tried to impose ones preferred language (itself the mother tongue of a miniscule of West Pakistanis then) on that spoken by the majority of the Pakistanis.  Furthermore, as the author states, there was “immense unequal distribution of real political power between the two regions”, which resulted in disproportional development and widening disparity in per capita income between the two regions.  He states what, in retrospect, has become obvious:  “The language issue thus assumed the nature of a democratic movement --- for cultural identity, freedom from political domination and economic exploitation.”
The language controversy, as Akanda discusses in two brief, but informative, chapters, began even before the birth of Pakistan; in fact, following the adoption of the Lahore Resolution in 1940, when a number of journalists, intellectuals, and educationists called for Bengali to be made a state language of Pakistan.  Some of their writings were prescient.  For example, Qazi Motahar Hossain warned in an article in 1947:  “Any attempt to impose Urdu on the Bengali Hindu-Muslims by physical force will be bound to fall (sic).  Because, rising discontent cannot be kept suppressed for long.  In that case, the relation between the East and the West will soon cease to exist.”  Even before Jinnah made his announcement in Dhaka, the debates of the Pakistan Constituent Assembly in February 1948 regarding the adoption of the Draft Rules of Procedures had to be conducted in English or in Urdu, but not in Bengali.  Dhirendranath Dutt, a Congress member from East Bengal, protested and moved an amendment to have Bengali included.  However, Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan opposed the motion and declared:  “It is necessary for a nation to have one language and that language can only be Urdu and no other language.”
The author then engages in a first-rate discussion on why the ML leaders were so committed to Urdu as being the state language, and why Urdu was not acceptable to the Bengalis, who had many leaders in ML, and who played a key role in the creation of Pakistan.  His chapter on the prelude to 21 February 1952 contains an observation that characterizes a major flaw in governance in Pakistan in its formative years.  When Section 144 was imposed in Dhaka on 20 February 1952, the Chief Minister of East Pakistan, Nurul Amin, maintained that the decision to promulgate it was taken at the administrative level, and he was not consulted about the matter!  “It is held that,” Akanda finds, “many important decisions were taken by Aziz Ahmed (the provincial government's chief secretary) and he informed the Chief Minister whenever he thought that necessary.”  The early grip taken on political power by the civil servants after Jinnah's death spelled the doom of the early growth of healthy political institutions in the country as weak and venal politicians played along with their machinations.
The language movement reached its bloody climax on 21 February 1952, meticulously detailed by the author, but its aftermath had long and wide repercussions for both the Bengalis and their language, and the future of Pakistan.  The first Shaheed Minar was constructed by Dhaka Medical College students and, although it was obliterated by the authorities almost as soon as it was completed, “since 1953 the area over which the first memorial stood became an invisible Shaheed Minar for the people of Bangladesh.”  However, as a harbinger of annual rituals to come, for the two days between its inauguration on 24 February and its destruction on 26 February 1952, it became a “centre of cultural pilgrimage for the Bengalis.”  The current Shaheed Minar was completed by 20 February 1963.  Akanda also chronicles language movements that took place outside Dhaka.  Some of them, especially in Bogra, in Rajshahi, Narayanganj and Mymensingh, were as intense and passionate as in Dhaka.  Their combined efforts eventually resulted in the UNESCO resolving on 17 November 1999 to declare 21 February as the International Mother Language Day.
Once the cultural movement reached its climax on 21 February 1952, political activities took over.  The chapter “The Language Movement after February 1952 Bloodbath” is illuminating in this regard.  On 10 April 1952, ML Constituent Assembly member Nur Ahmed moved a resolution in its session to the effect “That this Assembly is of the opinion that Bengali language with Urdu language shall be made the State Language of Pakistan.”  Although this motion was supported by Congress members from East Bengal, none of the ML Parliamentary Party from East Bengal, who was committed to support the demand for Bengali as per the resolutions of the East Bengal Legislative Assembly and the Provincial ML, responded favourably to Ahmed's proposal.  Such a turnaround led many to believe that the government had imposed a gag order on them.  The motion, though, was supported by some West Pakistani members, prominent among them being Sardar Shawkat Hayat Khan from the Punjab, Sardar Asadullah Jan Khan from the NWFP, and Seth Sukhdev from Sind.  Shawkat Hayat Khan also struck this warning note:  “If we, from West Pakistan, are going to oppose that urge of the people of East Pakistan, we will be responsible for starting trouble in East Pakistan, which may damage the very fabric of my country and my nation.”   
Eventually Article 214 of the 1956 Constitution stipulated that, “the State Languages of Pakistan shall be Urdu and Bengali.”  Akanda then comments basically on the factor of mistrust having been implanted in the average Bengali mind in terms of the West Pakistanis:  “By the time the Government conceded, much inter-regional tensions were already generated which only tended to undermine the sense of national unity.  In fact, the language movement was responsible for bringing about a qualitative change in the relationship between the two regions.  This led to:  (i) increased tension between the two regions, fanning fires of regionalism; and (ii) the generation of more or less a permanent reservoir of mistrust in the minds of the people of East Pakistan.”  The mistrust widened as Akanda's account in the chapter “Attack on Bengali Culture and Heritage in Spite of Acceptance of Bengali as a National Language” eloquently testifies to.  The preposterous concepts of “Islamization of Bengali”, the condemnation of the poems and songs of Rabindranath Tagore as being “against Pakistan's cultural values”, and the categorization of the observance of Pahela Baishakh as being a festival of the minorities, meaning the Hindus, among others, were examples of such crass cultural hegemony.  In fact, in Akanda's words, “The effect of the government policy on the cultural front…turned out to be totally counter-productive in East Pakistan.”
The author includes some pointed observations on society and power structure in the chapter on the Ayub-Yahya military junta:  “In Pakistan, the power groups that dominated the social, economic and political scenes were formed by the semi-feudal landlords, industrialists (monopolists), bureaucrats and the army…. None of these power groups…is known to have great love for democracy…. The imposition of martial law was considered by many to have been engineered by these power groups.”  These factors and the language movement and its aftermath taken together, almost inevitably, led to this conclusion arrived at by Akanda:  “The unique experiment of building up a state on the basis of religion with two regions, more than a thousand miles apart, each having its own distinct culture, proved futile.”  There are instances of careless editing in the book.  Professor Muzaffar Ahmad Chowdhury passed away after 1974, and the 11 March 1948 hartal and demonstrations in Chittagong could NOT have been chaired by Abdul Karim Shahityabisharad if, as is given, he had died in 1933!  Furthermore, “the usual powers of judicial review” is not “a characteristic feature of federalism.”  In fact, judicial review is not even a constitutional provision in the federation of the United States of America.  It became a convention in that country following the decision of Chief Justice John Marshall in the Marbury v Madison case.  These are minor errors. Language Movement and the Making of Bangladesh is a major work on the initial critical step towards a sovereign independent Bangladesh.

Shahid Alam is an educationist, actor and former diplomat