বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতা যুদ্ধ দলিলপত্র (দ্বিতীয় খণ্ড)/২৩
| শিরোনাম | সূত্র | তারিখ |
| আইউবের অভিযোগের জবাবে আজম খানের চিঠি। |
আজম খানের কাগজপত্র | ১৬ জুন, ১৯৬২ |
(TRUE COPY)
PERSONAL/ CONFIDENTIAL
No: MAK/X/P.
To
FIELD MARSHAL MOHAMMAD AYUB KHAN. N.Pk., H.J.
President of Pakistan,
Rawalpindi.
SIR.
I am extremely surprised and pained at the contents of your letter No. 374PAP/62. dated 7th June, 1962. Before dealing with it, may I remind you of your letter, dated 12th April, 1962 wherein you have observed
“Whilst regretfully accepting your resignation I repeat my appreciation of the excellent work you have done and say that I shall always entertain the highest of regard for you besides wanting to assist you in any legitimate manner I can.”
This I took to be a genuine appreciation of my services on your part-not realizing that you were playing politics with me. As I now find from your letter of 7th June, 1962 that you did not mean what you said in your former letter and desisted from expressing your dissatisfaction so that I might not leave the Province at once and thus deprive you of the opportunity of using me to complete your programme of elections. As you have now come out with serious allegations against my work in East Pakistan for the purpose of as you say 'keeping the records straight, I feel, I should in fairness to myself and to the people do some plain speaking and request you to keep this my reply on record, in order to complete it.
I simply fail to understand why, if you really thought I had the defects now imputed to me, you insisted on appointing me as the Governor of East Pakistan, kept me on for two years and when I resigned instead of accepting my resignation, sent General Burki to persuade me to stay on and then you yourself did your utmost to dissuade me from leaving the Governorship. The aspect of the matter by itself is sufficient to show that there is no force in the points now alleged against me and your letter of 7th June. 1962 is clearly an after-thought. IIowever, I shall meet your points individually.
The first point against me is-
“You have no idea of financial discipline or distribution of resources. When you take a project in hand you desire that the resource of the whole country should be diverted to your project even at the cost of all their activities if need be.”
“Wittingly or unwittingly you made it a point never to say 'no' to any demand, however, impossible or manifestly unreasonable that demand might be, thus taking credit for whatever was accomplished and passing on the blame to the Centre for whatever had to be denied. You took the least line of resistance.”
At no time did the people of East Pakistan push me into accepting impossible and manifestly unreasonable demands for which, according to your statement, I am supposed to have taken credit whilst passing all the blame to the Centre. Nor have I at any stage been devoid of financial discipline and sense of proper distribution of resources, as to have desired that the resources of the whole country should be diverted to any particular project. If anyone is trying to make you believe such stories it must be out of sheer malice and complete disregard for your own sense of reasoning. You yourself are fully aware of the policy and procedures followed with regard to scrutiny, sanction, allocation of funds and implementation of all projects and demands of Provinces. According to the policy decided between the Centre and the Provinces it was my duty to put up the maximum projects, subject to approval, with the object of increasing the absorbing capacity of the Province for allocations made. Once the Centre makes annual allocations there is no scope for further demands by the Provinces and at the same time the Centre should not change allocations once commitments have been made to the Provinces. There is no doubt that we had sometimes to fight tough battles at the Governors' conferences with the Central Economic Council and other Agencies over our sanctions but it was in the normal course and should have been taken in the best of spirit and appreciated and not brought as allegations.
Another point raised against me relates to my resignation when you asked me to go to East Pakistan as Governor. This matter was fully discussed several times and also in my letter or resignation written on that occasion which is a complete answer to your remarks in the third paragraph of your letter under discussion. To refresh your memory, I am enclosing herewith a copy of that letter of resignation. Your statement that you had almost to force me to leave for East Pakistan on a special plane surprises me. It was only after you sent General Burki to say that you were coming to apologies to me for having lost your temper and accused me of being afraid to go to East Bengal, that I left for Dacca without waiting to meet you. I did this to save you the embarrassment and also to prove to you that I was not afraid to go to East Pakistan although my work at the Centre and specially that of rehabilitation of refugees in West Pakistan was incomplete and my going away at that time was to the detriment of the people as explained in detail in my letter of resignation dated 14th April '60. No one forced me to leave; in fact, you were not even aware that I had left for Dacca; nor was any special plane arranged by you. In order to be there in time, I had to do over 12 hours of night flying during Nor-Wester period in a small plane, the only thing available. It is extremely unfair that you should now refer to this incident as a point against me when after I took over you made appreciative remarks about my having done so. Another point raised against me is-
“You were the Agent of the Centre. The popularity of the Agent should have meant the popularity of the principal. Your conduct, however, brought about the opposite result. It created the impression among the population of East Pakistan that to get anything for them, a continual battle had to be waged against an unwilling and an unsympathetic Centre. Not once did you mention to them my real feelings in regard to the development of East Pakistan and the urgency and importance I gave to it. Not once did you try convincingly to explain to (hem the limitations of our resources, the struggle we have to put up to get resources from abroad, the restrictions that other countries placed on tying up their grants and loans, to particular projects, or the implications of an integrated economy planned on a national basis. You say that you worked with “utmost loyalty and devotion". May I modify it by saying that you worked with “utmost energy and zeal. I am afraid, that ‘loyalty and devotion' to the higher cause got sacrificed at the altar of personal popularity. The results were inevitable. I warned you repeatedly of the dangers inherent in your approach. The anti-Pakistan elements were quick to exploit this situation, and by their activities were making a bid to loosen discipline in East Pakistan to jeopardize the national interest. When this happened you started evading controversial issues connected with law and order.”
All your policies were duly projected and implemented by me, but wherever I honestly disagreed with your views 1 did not hesitate to express them frankly and fully. Throughout my attempt has been to look to the interests of the people and the country and not to those of any particular individual. It is absolutely clear in everyone's mind without any doubt that the credit for the work done by me in both wings of Pakistan has all gone to the credit of the Regime and to you. It was not necessary for me to go out of my way to flatter you as you are personally aware that I am not given to flattery, a fact which I have repeated to you on many occasions. If you feel dissatisfied with this policy, I am not disturbed in mind as I have done what God and the country expected me to do.
I see no justification whatsoever in your remark about my loyalty and devotion. When you managed to get three extensions in the tenure of your Command as C-in-C, although it was against army traditions and considerably prejudiced my chances of promotion, I did not apply for release but continued to serve with the same energy and zeal’ sacrificing personal interest at the altar of ‘loyalty and devotion to the higher cause’.
I also hope that you have not forgotten when in 1958 I was drawn into the Revolution I had to go to the extent of risking my life and sacrificing my army career for the cause of the country and the nation. Again when you deprived me of my permanent commission in the Armed Forces ordering my premature compulsory retirement in February, 1960, according to army regulations 1 was perfectly fit for a much longer tenure. I did not question your action but made a personal sacrifice, rather than create a situation whereby the nation might have suffered, as we were at the time passing through a very delicate period.
Unfortunately you always seem to lake counsel from your imaginary fears. Although I have resigned, my popularity seems to be haunting you. Judging from the contents of your letter I am constrained to observe that the Editorial captioned Task before Faruque appearing in the Pakistan times of Lahore on 14th May, 1962, and the subsequent distorted and controversial letters to the Editor were all inspired.
As an old soldier and a comrade it was the bitterest shock to me to find you so unsporting as to twist the facts leading to my resignations on both the occasions. These facts have been brought out in both my letters of resignations clearly. In both instances you sent General Burki to apologies on your behalf and you made every effort personally to appeal to my sentiments on the basis of old family friendship and professional comradeship and praise for me and my work, persuading me to withdraw my resignations. These false and unjust allegations were not even hinted at in your previous conversations or correspondence throughout my career.
In reply to my complaint that I was not consulted in some of the matters seriously affecting the work I had to do, and my sincerest advice was ignored in several matters including the Constitution-your statement that the only advice I gave on the Constitution was that you should not be in a hurry to bring the Constitution is, I am sorry to say, inaccurate and incorrect. It was in 1959 when you first informed us about your scheme of Basic Democracy with an outline of the type of Constitution you wanted, that I suggested that we should concentrate on completing our programme of refugee resettlement and urgent and vital development schemes and leave the Constitution making to experts and various representatives of the people as we were no authorities on the subject.
In the very next paragraph of the same letter you yourself state that I did express my views with regard to the provisions of the new Constitution when it was being discussed at the Governor's conferences. But here again, the statement that those views were duly considered, or that I did not attempt to advance any reasons in support of the points I raised, I am sorry to say is not correct. In fact on one occasion in the mids of a heated argument on the provisions of the Constitution when I repeatedly argued in favor of Fundamental Rights being made justifiable, supremacy and powers of the Judiciary, and revival of the political parties etc., you went to the extent of shouting at me saying why are you worrying-I have to sign the Constitution not you Azam. Thereafter, I was taken into full confidence with regard to the provisions of the Constitution. I would, therefore, repeat that I did give you advice with regard to the Constitution and you were not prepared to accept it or even consider it.
Referring to my strong protest on my not being consulted as a Governor when you took a decision on a most important matter, your letter reads as follows
“I believe you are referring to the arrest of Mr. Suhrawardy. Mr. Suhrawardy was in West Pakistan at the lime. IIis arrest was based on information given through the Central Intelligence agencies. He was actively engaged in preparing anti-Pakistan elements in East Pakistan to resist the Constitution whatever its form. It was your duty to take steps against it. but you did not as you were more concerned with your personal popularity and were not concerned with carrying out my policy which was your duly. I, however, could not evade my responsibility to the country. Ile was, therefore, taken into custody in Karachi
and you were informed of the situation by a Minister who was sent to Dacca by the first available plane. I do not know what more could I do.”
The elementary principle of Governance is that on the law and order situation the man on the spot should be consulted before any drastic action is taken. If there was information against Mr. Suhrawardy it must have been with the Central government for some time. It could not have been gathered within a few hours before arrest, so as to say that you had no time to consult me. If it was a case of my having failed in my duty in such an important matter, you should have directed me to take action or replaced me. The manner in which this matter has been dealt with by you and your government was decidedly unfair to me as Governor. If I had been consulted or at least been given adequate notice that the arrest would be made, I would have taken in time precautionary measures to prevent situations, like the one which actually arose consequent on the arrest and during your presence in the Province. In this connection I would remind you of my telling you that what you had done was a stab in the back; and I need hardly and that nothing more could have been done to meet the situation than what was actually done by me, to which you were witness. Had I not handled the situation as I did with restraint, the consequences would, as I have already pointed out to you, been disastrous. Hence there is no justification for your statement that....
“The impression I got during this period was that you found it distasteful to deal with an awkward situation demanding firmness. I found it my duty to express dissatisfaction on it. So, when you resigned and seemed to be in a hurry to leave, I had no option but to accept it.”
If you thought at the time that I found it distasteful to deal with an awkward situation demanding firmness being on the spot yourself you should have assumed complete control of the situation and issued definite orders to me shouldering the entire responsibility yourself. You did not do so. On the other hand, as long as you were in Dacca, you did not express dissatisfaction at the action that was being taken. It was only after going back to West Pakistan that you gave the impression that you were not satisfied with my way of handling the affairs of East Pakistan.
Your remark that I was in a hurry to leave is hardly fair. I wrote the letter of resignation on the 11th March and ultimately I agreed to stay on till the 10th May. If you really were under the impression that because of my inability to manage the situation, and as you were also dissatisfied with the action I took. I was anxious to leave the Province, you would not have asked me to stay. You should have consistently with your duty to the country relieved me immediately and not persuaded me to stay. Far from your being dissatisfied with my work, your insistence on my continuing as governor clearly showed that you felt at the time that I alone could handle the situation. The arguments in my letter of resignation were not ‘spurious’.
It is very well known to all of us that this country has suffered because individual whims and moods, undue interference with the administration and personal ambitions were often catered for at the cost of firm principles and policy. The object of the Revolution would have been defeated if we were to compromise on those very principles.
I had, therefore, on option but to resign when certain fundamental principles were violated, as already pointed out in my letter of resignation dated 11th March 1962. to which you sent me an immediate signal to say that as the matter required personal discussion you proposed discussing it with me during your visit to Hast Pakistan, which you did but I declined to continue as Governor and stuck to my decision to resign, wishing to be relieved at the earliest.
A month later you sent me a letter appreciating my work and whilst regretfully accepting my resignation you made the following suggestion: “Regulations permit me to give you four months' leave minus 19 days that you have availed of. Will you, therefore, please let me know if you wish to avail of it. This is urgent as I propose to make a formal announcement of these changes soon so as to slop unnecessary speculations.”
My immediate reply may kindly be noted-
“Thanks for your letter of 12th April. I appreciate the kind remarks which you have made about my services to the country during my tenure of office. As I have repeatedly emphasized both in correspondence and discussions, my resignation is motivated by my very strong views on matters of principle, which, for me effectively outweigh the attractions of high office, and my anxiety is thus to be relieved with the least possible delay, although if it proves impossible to arrange for my successor to join before the 10th May, I shall in deference to your request stay on until then. As regards your enquiry whether I should like to take leave after handing over charge, I am fully aware of my rights under the regulations, but, since I am resigning on point of principle. I did not intend to avail myself of my leave concessions.”
You must not lose sight of the fact that I went to East Pakistan as your representative, and under the extraordinary circumstances prevailing during the Martial Law. I had also to represent and fight for the problems and just demands of the people at the Governors' conferences which were held for this very reason. If I had behaved like the glorified Agent of a bureaucratic Government of the British times, East Pakistan would have been justified in their oft repeated complaint that they were treated like a colony.
I tried my best to bring you close to the people. I very well remember that when you visited Last Pakistan after the great cyclone to assess the situation for yourself. I naturally thought that you would be more anxious than myself to see the affected area and say a word of cheer to the men, women and children to raise their morale. So I arranged a tour for you, but in that part of the world the only means of getting to the Islands is by helicopter and I have never regretted anything so much as asking you to visit these places because for months I had to correspond with your Military Secretary and Air Marshal to explain as to why I had taken the risk of putting you on a helicopter.
I did not desire to seek popularity. My anxiety was only to help the afflicted in their hours of distress during the natural calamities that overtook the Province, as well as in the implementation of the development plans. My sincere effort regardless of my personal safety and comfort especially in coming to the aid of the people in their hours of extreme distress and danger was deeply appreciated by them. To say that I was trying to sacrifice loyalty and devotion at the altar of personal popularity or that I tried to gain popularity through 'financial indiscipline' is not only a grave injustice to me but a hard blow to the sentiments and prestige of the people of East Pakistan. There can be no greater ignominy inflicted on them than to say that they could be bribed into shedding tears for me or that the anti-Pakistan elements were able to exploit their sentiments for the purpose of loosening discipline in East Pakistan to jeopardize national interest.
At no time was that part of Pakistan closer to the Centre than it was during my tenure. In the interest of national unity and prosperity, the sincere and selfless work that I have put in those two years cannot be denied by you or anybody else as the whole nation is witness to it.
I shall conclude by saying let my God and my nation be my judge. Individual opinion can never be regarded as reliable, no matter how highly placed the individual may be.
It is not a pleasure to me to recount these facts but your letter has left me no alternative and in fairness to myself I cannot leave these serious allegations in your letter dated 7th June 1962 unanswered.