People are much important than land or some fake sense of unity or some good for nothing national pride. If a state has to use bombings to keep parts of its country occupied then it means it has no moral authority to have that part. Peaceful division of Pakistan is much better than bloodshed of kids. If Pakistanis don’t like people of FATA and Baluchistan, and are even ready to bomb their kids then why Pakistan is forcing them to stick together?
The way fake liberals who in reality are sectarian and social class fascists, pseudo nationalists and troop worshipers support these bombings clearly shows how Pakistanis feel about tribal people. The attitude is no different for Baluchistan operation victims.
Many of the pro-war fake liberals and troop worshipers even advocate carpet bombings and some maniacs even talk about the option of nuking insurgency hit areas.
The attitude was same for Bengalis and now these troop worshipers and pseudo nationalists put the complete blame on India or other countries for the creation of Bangladesh. After mercilessly killing people, they expect them to stay loyal to the state which is ruled by the ones who are bombing them and if they rise up to claim their right to exist freely then they are termed as traitors. People who opposed operations against Bengalis were also termed as traitors and similar is happening with those who oppose bombings on FATA and operations in Baluchistan.
The way people in Karachi, Lahore Islamabad and Rawalpindi treat the lives of Balochis and tribal people, I don’t think separation is a bad idea. Its better to go for a peaceful separation of these areas from Pakistan as it will keep the options of good future relationships including free trade zones, visa free travel, common market like Euro zone etc open unlike Bangladesh where the wounds of Pakistan army brutalities are still fresh.
Next time when these fake liberals or troop worshipers go for their sit-ins against suicide attacks or any other activity resulting from this war mess then they should remember that they are the ones who fed this war monster and supported the principle of indiscriminate bombings to settle sectarian or political scores.
I really hate myself while writing this but need to write it to give an honest view point.
I am really disappointed with almost all of my Shia friends who support this war. I thought there must be some good significant number of Shias in Pakistan who don’t blindly toe the line of that Jerk Khemenei or Seestani but here it seems its not the case and almost all are determined to push not only their selves in this more war mess and resulting terrorism but also others too. Almost all my Shia friends cannot see the fact they are being used as a fuel for this war by Pakistani and other pro-war establishments including their beloved Khomenist regime in Iran.
I also criticize sunni or deobandi or ahl-e-hadith or other sects and social classes for the hate based crap some of their leaders or other people do (LeJ or ST or Mumtaz Qadri or Malik Ishaq types) but a clear thing which disappoints me is that others have broad range of views and diversity at extremes (almost all against innocent killings except few mad people) but for my almost all Shia friends it looks that they are toeing some kind of deep rooted hate based agenda against others with no room for reconciliation.
They need to know no anti-war on terror person supports suicide attacks on Hazara or on other Shia communities but what I have seen is that almost all (not all) of my Shia friends feel really happy when they know about deaths of people including children from other sects in tribal areas, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or any where else. Even in Pakistan, they don’t really sympathize with anyone else but merely use one majority sect like Barelvi against the others like Deobandi or Ahl-e-Hadith. The trend is not just in religious maniacs but also evident in so called liberal or moderates.
I have always criticized army for this war mess but those who think they are being victimized should also see where they are going or what they are becoming in blind hatred.
They are trying to eliminate any space for those who want peaceful resolution of this war issue as probably it doesn’t fit into their hate based agenda to settle some centuries old good for nothing historical issues. Anti-war on terror people always condemn LeJ or other groups but unfortunately my Shia friends almost never condemn aerial bombings or military’s use of heavy conventional or even chemical weapons against other sects which is a crime even in worldly laws.
I don’t have any sympathies now for those who want innocent killings on both sides to satisfy their hatred for other sects and social classes. my only concern is those unrelated (who do not support this war or resulting terrorism) people who die as collateral damage but unfortunately there is no way to discriminate one from the other in aerial or suicide bombings which Shia groups want when they support this war.
May the wrath of Allah be on those from both sides of the conflict (Army, TTP, MWM,LeJ,SUC,SIC, PPP, ST,PMLN,MQM or others) who support these mass murders either through aerial/drone/military bombings or through suicide attacks.
Even India never does aerial bombings (drone or jet) on civilian populated areas despite almost 2 dozens of insurgencies.
I pray for the hardest wrath of Allah on those who consider innocent dead kids as an unavoidable or tolerable or necessary collateral damage.
I still pray for the blind followers of this corrupt system to get on the path of justice and peace but it seems we are going for complete self-destruction.
If the hatred is about religion or sects then at least while supporting aerial bombings, we should remember what the holy book says:
“O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Informed of what ye do.” [Al-maeda ,8]
Recent statement by Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf, Imran Khan regarding Pak-India joint civil nuclear project on border is make some headlines in the news.
I think it’s not a bad idea but private sector should take the lead. It seems not everyone including people in PMLN or so called liberals like MQM are not happy with it and they are trying to show some security concerns regarding the project.
How scientifically uneducated people are that they cannot understand the difference between civil nuclear and military nuclear programs. He is talking about using the existing tech infrastructure in both countries for the betterment of the people like countries in Europe did after world wars when they built CERN or cooperated for other areas.
It is amazing that people who pushed Pakistan into this self-destructive imported ‘war on terror’ are criticizing a positive suggestion by someone who was warning Pakistanis about the negative consequences of jumping into the war, more than a decade ago.
He also talked about resolving the core issue of Kashmir, the cause which I strongly support, but not much focus on that by MQM or other pro-War groups who have been found working for foreign powers including USA or India on numerous occasions. As I pointed out previously that fake liberals can’t understand the meaning of equality based mutually beneficial relationships. They only know about master-slave or enemy-enemy relationships. Kashmir is core issue not just between India and Pakistan but the real party in the issue are Kashmiri people. Instead of using the issue for political point scoring or exploiting nationalist jingoism, we need serious steps towards peace in the region. I think if we can find people like Imran Khan on Indian side as well then we can have a good chance of peace in the region and justice based resolution of issues.
I am not sure what is so bad about Shehzad Roy’s opinion about excluding chapters related to Muslim conquerors from text books of early classes? Instead of indoctrinating with a predefined opinion (right or wrong) focus should be on capacity building of a child’s brain. Once the brain is developed to think freely then present history with alternate view points on it so that a child can make up his own mind on the issues. Whats wrong with that?
The problem is that most people seem to be used to of blind following of their sufis, mullahs, ayotullahs etc and too much into blind nationalism. Is it necessary to develop a child’s brain on india hatred? Yes, we have problems with India over Kashmir and many other issues but instead of teaching them establishment’s version of history we can help them develop an understanding of concepts like freedom, justice, free thinking etc and I am sure once a child will grow up and if he sees injustice being done not only in Kashmir but also in FATA, Balochistan etc then he will develop discontent with the situation in these areas.
The problem is they want to develop hatred with India or other enemies but not with the injustices they were doing which lead to divisions because the establishment and their supporters are doing injustices in their own country which are sometime worse than what India is doing in Kashmir. India never used aerial bombings on occupied Kashmir’s civil population but Pakistan establishment did it many times on tribal areas.
We need to understand that Jinnah and Iqbal were not brought up on India hatred but still they are known as founders of Pakistan.
Troops killing Kashmiris to suppress their struggle
Srinagar, (KMS): In occupied Kashmir, Indian troops, in their fresh act of state terrorism, martyred three innocent Kashmiri youth during a siege and search operation in Manjote area of Ramban, today.
The All Parties Hurriyet Conference leader, Nayeem Ahmed Khan visited Chogal area of Handwara to express solidarity with the family of a student recently martyred in custody by the troops.
Addressing a gathering on the occasion, he said that the troops were killing innocent Kashmiris to suppress their just liberation struggle.
The APHC spokesman in a statement in Srinagar strongly denounced the re-arrest of Hurriyet leader, Zafar Akbar Butt, from a court immediately after his release and shifting him to Joint Interrogation Centre in Jammu.
In London, the Executive Director of Kashmir Centre, Professor Nazir Ahmed Shawl in a statement welcomed the meeting between the Foreign Secretaries of India and Pakistan in Thimphu, Bhutan, and appealed to the international community to facilitate the dialogue process and assist the two countries to resolve the Kashmir dispute as per the aspirations of the Kashmiri people.
Another 16 December is here and I don’t think much lessons are learned from a disaster which could have made any nation with some conscience to think over its strategies. Still our military establishment is involved in dirty politics, working for imperialist agenda and busy in securing their business agenda. Our establishment and politicians have not learned much lessons and are still busy in following unjust practices, suppression and killing of own people to please their masters and fulfil their greed.
“Indiscriminate killing and looting could only serve the cause of the enemies of Pakistan. In the harshness, we lost the support of the silent majority of the people of East Pakistan.” — Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission Report on 1971
Recommendations below are taken from the Supplementary report issued by Hamood ur Rehman Commission which was setup to investigate the events in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).
There are parts which are missing as the report is never officially released and it was published by some indian media.
Full Supplementary Report can be downloaded from here :
In the concluding portion of our Main Report, submitted in 1972, we had made a number of
recommendations based on our study of the various aspects of the causes of the debacle of
1971. Some of these recommendations need to be modified, or amplified, in the light of the fresh
evidence, which we have now recorded: while the need for the others has only been further
emphasised, we believe that the object of setting up this Commission would be fully realised
only if appropriate and early action is taken by the Government on these recommendations.2.
consider that it would be appropriate if all our recommendations are now finally set out at one
place, for facility of reference and action. Detailed reasons and justification for these
recommendations will be found in the relevant Chapters of the Main Report as well as this
Supplementary Report. We are aware that some of these recommendations have already been
implemented, but this would not appear to be a reason for not including them in this final
Commanders who have brought disgrace and defeat to Pakistan by their subversion of the
Constitution, usurpation of political power by criminal conspiracy, their professional
incompetence, culpable negligence and wilful neglect in the performance of their duties and
physical and moral cowardice in abandoning the fight when they had the capability and
resources to resist the enemy. Firm and proper action would not only satisfy the nation’s
demand for punishment where it is deserved, but would also ensure against any future
recurrence of the kind of shameful conduct displayed during the 1971 war. We accordingly
recommend that the following trials be undertaken without delay.
(I) That General Yahya Khan, General Abdul Hamid Khan, Lt. Gen. S.G.M.M. Pirzada, Lt. Gen.
Gul Hasan, Maj. Gen. Umar and Maj Gen Mitha should be publicly tried for being party to a
criminal conspiracy to illegally usurp power from F.M. Mohammad Ayub Khan in power if
necessary by the use of force. In furtherance of their common purpose they did actually try to
influence political parties by threats, inducements and even bribes to support their designs both
for bringing about a particular kind of result during the elections of 1970, and later persuading
some of the political parties and the elected members of the National Assembly to refuse to
attend the session of the National Assembly scheduled to be held at Dacca on the 3rd of
March, 1971. They, furthermore, in agreement with each other brought about a situation in East
Pakistan which led to a civil disobedience movement, armed revolt by the Awami League and
subsequently to the surrender of our troops in East Pakistan and the dismemberment of
(ii) That the Officers mentioned in No. (I) above should also be tried for criminal neglect of duty in
the conduct of war both in East Pakistan and West Pakistan. The details of this neglect would
be found in the Chapters dealing with the military aspect of the war
(iii) That Lt. Gen. Irshad Ahmad Khan, former Commander 1 Corps, be tried for criminal and
wilful neglect of duty in conducting the operations of his Corps in such a manner that nearly 500
villages of the Shakargarh tehsil of Sialkot district in West Pakistan were surrendered to the
enemy without a light and as a consequence the Army offensive in the south was seriously
(iv) That Maj Gen Abid Zahid, former GOC 15 Div, be tried for wilful neglect of duty and shameful
surrender of a large area comprising nearly 98 villages in the phuklian salient in the Sialkot
district of West Pakistan, which surrender also posed a standing threat to the safety of Marala
Headworks by bringing the Indian forces within nearly 1500 yards thereof. He also kept the GHQ
in the dark about Indian occupation of the Phuklian salient until the loss was discovered after
(v) That Maj. Gen B.M. Mustafa, former GOC 18 Division, be tried for wilful neglect of duty in that
his offensive plan aimed at the capture of the Indian position of Ramgarh in the Rajasthan area
(Western Front) was militarily unsound and haphazardly planned, and its execution resulted in
severe loss of vehicles and equipment in the desert.
(vi) That Lt. Gen. A.A.K. Niazi, former Commander, Eastern Command, be court-martialled on
15 charges as set out in Chapter III of part V of the Supplementary Report regarding his wilful
neglect in the performance of his professional and military duties connected with the defence of
East Pakistan and the shameful surrender of his forces to the Indians at a juncture when he still
had the capability and resources to offer resistance.
(vii) That Maj Gen Mohammad Jamshed, former GOC 36 (ad-hoc) Division, Dacca, be tried by
court martial on five charges listed against him, in the aforementioned part of the Supplementary
Report, for wilful neglect of his duty in the preparation of plans for the defence of Dacca and
showing complete Jack of courage and will to fight, in acquiescing in the decision of the
Commander, Eastern Command, to surrender to the Indian forces when it was still possible to
put up resistance for a period of two weeks or so, and also for wilfully neglecting to inform the
authorities concerned, on repatriation to Pakistan, about the fact of distribution of Rs.50,000 by
him out of Pakistan currency notes and toher funds at his disposal or under his control in East
(viii) That Maj Gen M. Rahim Khan, former GOC 39 (ad-hoc) Division, Chandpur, in East
Pakistan, be tried by court martial on five charges listed against him in this Report for showing
undue regard for his personal safety in abandoning his Division, his Divisional troops and area of
responsibility and Vacating his Divisional Headquarters from Chandpur on the 8th of December,
1971; for his wilful insistence on moving by day owing to fear of Mukti Bahini and thus causing
the death of fourteen Naval ratings and four Officers of his own HQ, besides injuries to himself
and several others, due to strafing by Indian aircraft; for his abandoning valuable signal
equipment at Chandpur; for spreading despondency and alarm by certain conversation on the
12th of December, 1971, at Dacca; and for wilfully avoiding submitting a debriefing report to
GHQ on being specially evacuated to West Pakistan in early 1971 so as to conceal the
circumstances of his desertion from him Divisional Headquarters at Chandpur.
(ix) That Brig. G.M. Baquir Siddiqui, former GOS, Eastern Command, Dacca, be tried by court
martial on nine charges as formulated in this Report, for his wilful neglect of duty in advising the
Commander, Eastern Command, as regards the concept and formulation of defence plans,
appreciation of the Indian threat, execution of denial plans, abrupt changes in command,
friendliness with he Indian during captivity and attempts to influence formation Commanders by
threats and inducements to present a co-ordinated story before the GHQ and the Commission
of Inquiry in regard to the events leading to surrender in East Pakistan.
(x) That Brig Mohammad Hayat, former Commander 107 Brigade, 9 Division, East Pakistan, be
tried by court martial on four charges for displaying wilful neglect in not formulating a sound plan
for the defence of the fortress of Jesore; for failing to properly plan and command the brigade
counter-attack at Gharibpur, for shamefully abandoning the fortress of Jessor and delivering
intact to the enemy all supplies and ammunition dumps; and disobeying the orders of the GOC
9 Divison, to withdraw to Magura in the event of a forced withdrawal from Jessore;
(xi) That Brig Mohammad Aslam Niazi, former commander 53 Brigade, 39 (ad-hoc) Division,
East Pakistan, be tried by court martial on six charges for displaying culpable lack of initiative,
determination and planning ability in that he failed to occupy and prepare defences at
Mudafarganj as ordered by his GOC on the 4th of December, 1971; for failing to eject the enemy
from Mudafarganj as ordered on the 6th of December, 1971; for shamefully abandoning the
fortress of Laksham on or about the 9th of December, 1971; for wilful neglect in failing to
properly organise oxfiltration of his troops from the fortress of Laksham to Comilla on the 9th of
December, 1971, thus resulting in heavy casualties and capture of several elements of his
troops on the way; for showing callous disregard of military ethics in abandoning at Laksham
124 sick and wounded with two Medical Officers without informing them about the proposed
vacation of the fortress; and for abandoning intact at Laksham all heavy weapons, stocks of
ammunition and supplies for the use of the enemy;
II. Inquiry and Trials for Alleged AtrocitiesThat as recommended in Paragraph 7 of Chapter III of Part V of the Main Report and in
Paragraph 39 of Chapter II of Part V of this Supplementary Report, a high-powered Court or
Commission of Inquiry be set up to investigate into persistent allegations of atrocities said to
have been committed by the Pakistan Army in East Pakistan during its operations from March
to December, 1971, and to hold trials of those who indulged in these atrocities, brought a bad
name to the Pakistan Army and alienated the sympathies of the local population by their acts of
wanton cruelty and immorality against our own people. The composition of the Court of Inquiry,
if not its proceedings, should be publicly announced so as to satisfy national conscience and
international opinion. The Commission feels that sufficient evidence is now available in Pakistan
for a fruitful inquiry to be undertaken in this regard. As the Government of Bangladesh has since
been recognised by Pakistan, it may also be feasible to request the Dacca authorities to
forward to this Court of Inquiry whatever evidence may be available with them.
III. Other Inquiries(I) That allegations of personal immorality, drunkenness and indulgence in corrupt practices
against General Yahya Khan, General Abdul Hamid Khan and Maj. Gen Khuda Dad Khan be
properly investigated as there is prima facie evidence to show that their moral degeneration
resulted in indecision, cowardice and professional incompetence. In the light of the result of this
inquiry suitable charges may be added against these Officers, during the trials we have already
recommended earlier. The details of the allegations and the evidence relating thereto will be
found in Chapter I of Part V of the Main Report.
(ii) That similar allegations of personal immorality, acquiring a notorious reputation in this behalf
at Sialkot, Lahore and Dacca, and indulgence in the smuggling of Pan from East to West
Pakistan made against Lt. Gen Niazi should also be inquired into and, if necessary, made the
subject matter of additional charges at the trial earlier recommended in respect of the
performance of his professional duties in East Pakistan. The details of these allegations and
the evidence relating thereto will be found in Chapter I of Part V of the Main Report and in
Chapter I of part V of this supplementary Report.
(iii) That an inquiry is also indicated into the disposal of Rs.50, 000 said to have been distributed
by Maj. Gen. Mohammad Jamshed, former GOC 39 (ad-hoc) Division and Director General,
East Pakistan Civil Armed Forces immediately before the surrender on the 16th of December
1971. Details of this matter including the General’s explanation would be found in Paras 21 to
23 of Chapter I of Part V of the Supplementary Report. We have already recommended that this
Officer be tried by a court martial on several charges including his wilful failure to disclose any
facts at all about his sum Rs.50,000. That charge does not necessarily imply any dishonest
practice on his part. The inquiry now suggested can form a part of the charges already
(iv) That allegations of indulging in large-scale looting of property in East Pakistan including theft
of Rs.1, 35,00,000 from the National Bank Treasury at Siraj Ganj persistently made against
Brig. Jehanazeb Arbab, former Commander 57 Brigade, Lt Col (now Brig) Muzaffar Ali Zahid,
former CO 31 Field Regiment, Lt. Col Basharat Ahmad, former CO 18 Punjab, Lt. Col
Mohammad Taj, former CO 32 Punjab, Lt Col Mohammad Tufail, former CO 55 Field Regiment
and Major Madad Hussain Shah of 18 Punjab, as set out in Paras 24 and 25 of Chapter I of part
V of the Supplementary Report, should be thoroughly inquired into and suitable action taken in
the light of the proved facts.
(v) That an inquiry be held into the allegation, noticed by us in Para 36 of Chapter 1 of Part V of
the Main Report, that while serving in the Martial Law Administration at Multan, Maj. Gen.
Jahanzeb, presumably a Brigadier at that time, demanded a bribe of Rs. one lac from a PCS
Officer posted as Chairman of the Municipal Committee of Multan, on pain of proceeding against
him for corruption under martial Law, as a consequence of which demand the said PCS Officer
is said to have committed suicide leaving behind a letter saying that although he had made only
Rs.15,000 he was being required to pay Rs. one lac to the Martial Law officers. The allegation
was made before the Commission by Brig. Mohammad Abbas Beg (Witness No.9)
(vi) That in inquiry is also necessary into the allegation made against Brig. Hayatullah that he
entertained some wom en in his bunker in the Maqbulpur sector (West Pakistan) on the night of
the 11th or 12th of December, 1971, when Indian shells were falling on his troops. The
allegation was contained in an anonymous letter addressed to the Commission and supported
in evidence before us by the Brigadier Hayatullah’s brigade, Major, namely, Major Munawar
Khan (Witness No.42).
(vii) That it is necessary to investigate into the allegations, as set out in Paragraphs 9 to 14 of
Chapter 1 of Part V of the Main Report, to the effect that senior Army Commanders grossly
abused their official position and powers under the Martial Law to acquire large allotments of
land, and obtained substantial house buildings loans on extremely generous terms from certain
banking institutions with which they deposited large amounts from departmental funds entrusted
to their care. Those found guilty of corrupt practices should receive the punishment they
deserve under the military law or the ordinary criminal law of the land as the case may be.
(viii) That a thorough investigation be conducted into the suspicion created in the mind of the
Commission, during the recording of additional evidence of Officers repatriated form India, that
there may be some complicity or collusion between the Commander, Easter Command (Lt Gen
A.A.K. Niazi) and his Chief of Staff (Brig G.M. Baqir Saddiqui) on the one hand and the Indian
authorities on the other in the matter of the failure of the Pakistan Armed Forces to carry out
execution of denial plans immediately before the surrender inspite of instructions issued in this
behalf by GHQ on the 10th of December, 1971. We have already included relevant charges in
this behalf against these two Officers, but we consider that it would be in the public interest to
depute a specialized agency to probe into the matter further. On the material available to us we
cannot put the matter higher than suspicion, but we have not been able to find any reasonable,
or even plausible explanation for the orders issued by the Easter Command to stop the
execution of denial plans, particularly in Dacc and Chittagong, thus ensuring the delivery intact
to the Indians of large amounts of war materials and other equipment. Details of these deliveries
will be found in our Chapter VII of Part IV dealing with the aftermath of surrender.
(ix) That an inquiry be held into the circumstances under which Commander Gul Zareen of the
Pakistan Navy was carried from Khulna to Singapore on the 7th of December, 1971, by a
French ship called M.V. Fortescue, thus abandoning his duties at PNS Titumir Naval Base,
Khulna. The case of this Officer was dealt with by us in Paras 12 and 13 of Chapter III of Part V
of the Main Report.
IV. Cases Requiring Departmental ActionWhile examining the course of events and the conduct of war in East Pakistan, we formed a
poor opinion about the performance and capabilities of Brig. S.A.Ansari, ex-Commander 23
Brigade, Brig. Manzoor Ahmad, ex -Commander 57 Brigade, 9 Division, and Brig Abdul Qadir
Khan, ex -Commander 94 brigade, 36 (ad hoc) Division. We consider that their further retention
in service is not in the public interest and they may accordingly be retired.
V. Performance and Conduct of Junior OfficersIn the very nature of things the Commission was not in a position to examine at any length
the conduct and performance of officers below the brigade level, although some case
necessarily came to our notice where the performance of these Officers had a direct bearing on
the fate of important battles or where their conduct transgressed the norms of discipline. Such
cases have been mentioned by us at their proper place, but by and large cases of junior Officers
must be dealt with by the respective service headquarters who have obtained detailed debriefing
reports from all of them and are also in possession of the assessment of their performance by
their immediate superiors.
VI. Measures for Moral Reform in the Armed ForcesWhile dealing at some length with the moral aspect of the 1971 debacle, in Chapter I of Part
V of the Main Report as well as in the corresponding Chapter of the present Supplementary
Report, we have expressed the opinion that there is indeed substance in the widespread
allegation, rather belief, that due to corruption arising out of the performance of Martial Law
duties, lust for wine and women, and greed for lands and houses a large number of senior Army
Officers, particularly those occupying the highest positions, had not only lost the will to fight but
also the professional competence necessary for taking the vital and critical decisions demanded
of them for the successful prosecution of the war. Accordingly, we recommend that: –
(I) The Government should call upon all Officers of the Armed Forces to submit declarations of
their assets, both moveable and immovable, and those acquired in the names of their relations
and dependents during the last ten years (they were exempted from submitting such
declarations during the last two periods of martial Law). If on examination of such declarations
any Officer is found to have acquired assets beyond this known means, then appropriate action
should be taken against him
(ii) The Armed Services should devise ways and means to ensure: –
(a) That moral values are not allowed to be compromised by infamous behaviour particularly at
(b) That moral rectitude is given due weight along with professional qualities in the matter of
promotion to higher ranks;
(c) That syllabi of academic studies at the military academics and other Service Institutions
should include courses designed to inculcate in the young minds respect for religious
democratic and political institutions
(d) That use of alcoholic drinks should be banned in military messes and functions
(e) That serious notice should be taken of notorious sexual behaviour and other corrupt
VII. Discipline and Terms and Conditions of Service9.
reasons given therein we make the following recommendations: –
(I) An inter-services study should be undertaken of the operative terms and conditions of service
and amenities available to Officers, JCOs and other ranks of the Services so as to remove
disparities existing in this behalf and causing discontentment among the junior officers and
other ranks of various Services
(ii) The GHQ should consider the advisability of adopting recommendations contained in the
report submitted by the Discipline Committee headed by the late Maj Gen Iftikhar Khan Janjua
(iii) Th e Navy and Air Force might also appoint their own Discipline Committees to consider the
peculiar problems of their Services, such measure to be in addition to the inter-services study
VIII. Improvement and Modernizations of the Pakistan Navy10.
VIII of Part IV of the Main Report, and supplemented by further details of its operations in East
Pakistan is set out in this Supplementary Report, it seems to us that the following steps are
urgently called for to improve our naval capability: –
(I) That immediate attention should be given to he basic requirements for the modernizations of
the Pakistan Navy in order to make it capable of protecting the only sea port of Pakistan and of
keeping the life-lines of the nation open. The Navy has been sadly neglected ever since the first
Martial Law regime, for in the concept of Army Commander the Navy was not expected to play
much of a role. The folly of this theory was fully demonstrated during this war. The Pakistan
Navy, we strongly recommend, should have its own air arm of suitable aircraft for the purpose of
reconnaissance and for defence against missile boats. This is the only way in which the threat
posed by the growing Indian Navy and her missible boats can be countered.
(ii) There is urgent need for developing a separate harbour for the Navy away from Karachi, from
where the Navy can protect the approaches to Karachi more effectively
(iii) In view of the serious handicaps which were posed by the late conveyance of the D-day and
the H-hour to the Pakistan Navy and its total exclusion from he planning for war, the need for
making the Navy a fully operative member in he joint Chiefs of Staff Organization is imperative.
IX. Improvement in the Role of P.A.F.11. In Section (C) of Chapter VIII of Part IV of the Main Report as well as in a separate Chapter
of the present supplement (viz Chapter X of Part III), we have discussed at length the role and
performance of the P.A.F. in the 1971 war. In the light of that discussion, we recommend as
(I) We are not convinced that a more forward-looking posture cannot be adopted by eh Air Force
having regard to the peculiar needs of the country. We recommend, therefore, that Pakistan
should have more forward air fields located at such places from where it might be in a position to
give more protection to our vital line of communication as well as to major centres of industry.
The adoption of such a fo rward strategy would also increase the striking capabilities of our
(ii) There is need also to improve the working of our early warning system. The time lag
between the observation of an enemy aircraft by the first line of Mobile Observer Units and the
final collation of that information in the Air Operation Centre takes unduly long because of the
draftory system of reporting adopted. Training exercises to coordinate the working of the various
agencies employed for the operation of the early warning system should be held periodically to
keep them at a high pitch of efficiency.
(iii) The Karachi Port should also be provided as soon as possible, with a low level seawardlooking
radar which it seriously lacks and due to the want of which it suffered many handicaps
during the last war.
(iv) That with the increased Indian capability of blockading Karachi with missile boats the air
defence of Karachi should be attached greater importance. Leaving the defence of Karachi to be
tackled only by one squadron of fighters and a half squadron of bombers was extremely unwise.
X. Re-organization of Air Defence of Pakistan12. The subject of air defence has been discussed by us at some length in section (13) of
Chapter VIII of Part IV of the Main Report. In the light of that discussion, we make the following
(a) Since it will not be possible for us to enlarge our Air Force to any appreciable extent in the
near future, we strongly recommend that we should strengthen our air defence programmes by
at least doubling our holdings of anti-craft guns by the end of 1972 and ultimately raising it under
a phased programme to 342 Batteries as suggested by the Air Force.
(b) Efforts should also be made to procure ground to air missiles for a more effective air defence
of the country.
(c) If ground-to-air missiles are not available, then efforts should also be made to get radar
controlled medium HAA guns from China.
XI. Recommendations with Regard to Civil Defence Measures13.
consider that the following measures are called for to improve the civil defence aspects in
(a) The civil defence arrangements should be placed under the Ministry of Defence, and not be
made the responsibility of the Ministry of Interior or other individual departments. The Central
Government should accept the responsibility for the overall control and organization of the civil
defence of the country, as Provincial Governments have not been able to shoulder this
responsibility effectively in the past.
(b) Steps should be taken to improve the fire-fighting facilities in the country, particularly in ports
and industrial areas.
(c) Industrialists keeping inflammable materials near lines of communications and other
vulnerable points should be induce, or in fact obliged under the law, to accept responsibility for
the protection of their materials, and make effective arrangements for fire-fighting in their
(d) Provision should be made for storing large quantitative of petrol and other fuels underground.
XII. Higher Direction of War14.
Chapter XI of Part IV of the Main Report, and in the light of that discussion, we proposed the
following measures: –
(a) The three Service Headquarters should be located at one place along with the Ministry of
(b) The posts of Commander-in-Chiefs should be replaced by Chiefs of Staff of the respective
services (This, we understand, has already been done by the Government)/
(c) The Defence Committee of the Cabinet should be re-activated and it should be ensured that
its meetings are held regularly. A positive direction should be added in its Charter to give the
Cabinet Division the right to initiate proceedings for the convening of its meetings should be held
even in the absence of the President or the Prime Minister under the Chairmanship of the senior
most minister present.
(d) There should also be a Defence Ministers Committee and the Ministry of Defence should
assume its rightful position as a policy-making body and incorporating policy, decisions into
defence programmes after consultations with the three services. This should ensure the
preparations of realistic plans for the national defence with in the agreed framework of …….
allocations. It should meet under the chairmanship of the Defence Minister and comprise the
Defence Secretary, the three service chiefs, the financial advi ser for defence, the Director
General of Civil Defence, the Director General of munitions production, the Director General of
Defence Procurement, the Director General of inter-services Intelligence Directorate, the
Defence Scientific Adviser and any other Central Secretary or Service officer who may be
required for a particular item on agenda. If the defence portfolio is held by the President or the
Prime Minister then its meeting may be presided over by a Deputy Minister for or by the
Minister in charge of Defence Production (illegible) Minister is available, the Defence Secretary
should preside, irrespective of any considerations of protocol or (illegible)
(e) The Secretaries Coordination Committee as at present constituted, should continue
(f) (illegible) The three services should share (illegible) joint responsibility for national defence
and that all plans and programmes for the development of the (illegible) forces should be based
on joint (illegible) objectives, it is necessary. Therefore, that the three services Chief should
(illegible) As Joint Chiefs of Staff and not merely as individual Heads of their respective Services.
This Joint Chiefs or Staff should constitute a corporate body with collective responsibility having
its own (illegible) staff for evolving joint plans and its own Headquarters located on one place.
The (illegible) of chairman of this Joint Chiefs of Staff must be held by rotation, irrespective of the
personal ranks enjoyed by the three service chiefs. The duration of the tenure should be one
year at a time and the chairmanship should commence with the (illegible) Service, mainly, the
Army. A detailed Chapter of duties for this Joint Chiefs of Staff has been suggested in Annexure
‘I’ of Chapter XI of Part IV of the Main report.
(g) Under the Joint Chiefs of Staff Organisation there will not only by a Secretariat but also a
joint planning staff drawn from all the three Services. It might be designed as the Joint
Secretariat and Planning Staff. It will be responsible not only for providing the necessary
secretarial assistance (illegible) Also for evolving the joint defence plans and (illegible) studies
of processing of all matters of inter-(illegible) The Joint Chief of Staff may also have other Joint
Common to assist them on such matters, as it may consider necessary.
(h) The weakness, in the (illegible) of the armed forces, which have been brought by light,
(illegible) feel that there is need for an institution like the America” (illegible) General’ which
should be a body changed was the duty of carrying out surprise inspection and calling area the
formations and (illegible) concerned to demonstrate that the (illegible)
(this para not readable)
(i) We have also felt the (illegible) for in Institute of Strategic Studies, preferably as a part of a
University Programme. The need for such an (illegible) has been highlighted by the weakness in
our joint strategic panning by the three Services. We are of the opinion that such an Institute will
go a long way in producing studies of value for examination by the other defence organizations.
XIII National Security CouncilHaving examined the working of the National Security Council in Chapter XI of Part IV of the
Main Report we are of the opinion that there is no need for super-(illegible) such an organization
on the Directorate of Intelligence Bureau and the Directorate of Inter-services Intelligence. The
Security Council should therefore be abolished.
XIV. The Farman Ali incidentIn view of the fresh evidence examined by us regarding the role of Maj Gen Farman Ali,
which we have discussed in the concluding portion of Chapter III of Part V of the Supplementary
Report, recommendation No. 7 made in the Main Report has now become (illegible); as we have
found that in delivering a message to Mr. Paul Mare Henry, Assistant Secretary General of the
United Nations. Maj Gen Farman Ali, acted under the instructions of the Governor of East
Pakistan, who in turn had been authorised by the then President of Pakistan to make certain
proposals for settlement in East Pakistan at the critical juncture.
I was going through a book on History of American education system and how it was designed to make people the slaves of the state and ruling elites.
There were remarkable similarities between the build of American system and our own system based on Lord Macaulay’s ideas.
Here are Lord Macaulay’s reported views expressed on 2nd February 1835(See below regarding the quote):
“I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such caliber, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation.”
Like America many countries like Pakistan, India etc with colonial past share similar foundations in their education system.
The education systems takes away all the creativity, free though, and individual sense of being with freedom.
We are taught to be slaves with empty brains and no wisdom to think out of the box. The box is designed by the rulers we live under and the system we are supposed to serve from the time of our birth.
J. T. Gatto, in one of the chapters of the book excellently summarized the ways a state can produce children with empty minds.
In his fifteen points’s recipe to prepare empty children he talks of keeping children away from self learning, worrying about grades, keeping them away from family values, individual self grooming etc.
Below is the recipe J. T. Gatto gives for preparing empty children:
(From J. T. Gatto’s Underground history of American Education)
Not far to go now. Here is my recipe for empty children. If you want to cook whole children, as I
suspect we all do, just contradict these stages in the formula:
1. Remove children from the business of the world until time has passed for them to learn how to self-teach.
2. Age-grade them so that past and future both are muted and become irrelevant.
3. Take all religion out of their lives except the hidden civil religion of appetite and positive/negative reinforcement schedules.
4. Remove all significant functions from home and family life except its role as dormitory and casual companionship. Make parents unpaid agents of the State; recruit them into partnerships to monitor the conformity of children to an official agenda.
5. Keep children under surveillance every minute from dawn to dusk. Give no private space or time. Fill time with collective activities. Record behavior quantitatively.
6. Addict the young to machinery and electronic displays. Teach that these are desirable to recreation and learning both.
7. Use designed games and commercial entertainment to teach preplanned habits, attitudes, and language usage.
8. Pair the selling of merchandise with attractive females in their prime childbearing years so that the valences of lovemaking and mothering can be transferred intact to the goods vended.
9. Remove as much private ritual as possible from young lives, such as the rituals of food preparation and family dining.
10. Keep both parents employed with the business of strangers. Discourage independent livelihoods with low start-up costs. Make labor for others and outside obligations first priority, self-development second.
11. Grade, evaluate, and assess children constantly and publicly. Begin early. Make sure everyone knows his or her rank.
12. Honor the highly graded. Keep grading and real world accomplishment as strictly separate as possible so that a false meritocracy, dependent on the support of authority to continue, is created. Push the most independent kids to the margin; do not tolerate real argument.
13. Forbid the efficient transmission of useful knowledge, such as how to build a house, repair a car, make a dress.
14. Reward dependency in many forms. Call it “teamwork.”
15. Establish visually degraded group environments called “schools” and arrange mass movements through these environments at regular intervals. Encourage a level of fluctuating noise (aperiodic negative reinforcement) so that concentration, habits of civil discourse, and intellectual investigation are gradually extinguished from the behavioral repertoire.
We need to change our approach of how we are raising up our future generation so that at least our future generations can come up with a free and full of life world without false illusions.
To promote free thought we need to get rid of the suppression and submission we teach to our children while they are in their age of learning about life. Taking their liberty to figure out themselves and deciding for themselves cannot help the cause of making a creative mind.
Keeping them involved in an unwanted struggle for grades and numbers make them reluctant of taking good learning decisions for themselves. They become slaves of the system as following the system in best way can give them best grades so no room for out of the box or out of the system thinking.
Teamwork is good but when it is used to suppress individual creativity or taking the unwanted loads of others, it becomes a tool for exploitation.
All this suppression of free thought leads to accepting an unjust and totalitarian system run by few people from elite and it happens in a natural and unnoticeable way.
The approach we develop of following the system to get good grades eventually results in blindly following the wrong policies we see elsewhere in our whole country system or global system with the approach of submission and to get so called desired benefits out for ourselves.
It becomes imperceptive and irrational to talk about rationale behind following and challenging existing norms and ideas.
All these efforts to more regularize education on the standards set by the international donors will further contribute to the cause of slavery and taking away free thought.
If our minds are suppressed and controlled then our whole selves will be enslaved to more extent as no realization of enslavement or desire of freedom will be part of our lives.
Remember, the real threat to any totalitarian or imperialist power is that people start to think freely and justly.
Lord Macaulay’s Quote and Confusion about its origin:
I need to thank some of the people who pointed out about the confusing or I should say contradictory history of the quote mentioned above. I have done some searching on the quote and there are alternate views on this so presenting the other side of the story.
Before adding the quote I did some searching on it and among those searches I found :
2nd All-Ukrainian Conference of Indologists Kyiv (5-6 June 2007)
Statement of Mr. DEBABRATA SAHA Ambassador of India to Ukraine
at the Opening Session on 5th June, 2007
India: 60 Years of Independent Development
Culture under stress
As a value, culture has become increasingly marginalised in our land. Whether we are doing enough is something that we need to think about. There is not much time to be lost, writes B. N. Goswamy
Now after receiving many responses on the quote through emails, facebook, some comments on this page , I also tried to look into the issue and decided to revisit the statement and the history behind it. It seems the quote which is mentioned in many historical references quoted by many authors in their books, articles etc is vague. I also don’t believe that anything which is repeatedly reported can be necessarily right so its good to revisit the facts whenever we have doubts.
However the purpose of the article was not to write Macaulay’s statement or base an argument on that. The purpose was to point out the slave-colonial mindset we have developed over centuries which has moulded our minds from free thinking beings to slaves who have accepted imperialism to its core. The state is just used as explaining the problem in easy and concise words.
Text on the topic, “Minutes on Education” by Thomas Macaulay is given below (I have also highlighted the part which may have led to the confusing statement above either in reaction or some other way):
Minute by the Hon’ble T. B. Macaulay, dated the 2nd February 1835.
 As it seems to be the opinion of some of the gentlemen who compose the Committee of Public Instruction that the course which they have hitherto pursued was strictly prescribed by the British Parliament in 1813 and as, if that opinion be correct, a legislative act will be necessary to warrant a change, I have thought it right to refrain from taking any part in the preparation of the adverse statements which are.now before us, and to reserve what I had to say on the subject till it should come before me as a Member of the Council of India.
 It does not appear to me that the Act of Parliament can by any art of contraction be made to bear the meaning which has been assigned to it. It contains nothing about the particular languages or sciences which are to be studied. A sum is set apart “for the revival and promotion of literature, and the encouragement of the learned natives of India, and for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories.” It is argued, or rather taken for granted, that by literature the Parliament can have meant only Arabic and Sanscrit literature; that they never would have given the honourable appellation of “a learned native” to a native who was familiar with the poetry of Milton, the metaphysics of Locke, and the physics of Newton; but that they meant to designate by that name only such persons as might have studied in the sacred books of the Hindoos all the uses of cusa-grass, and all the mysteries of absorption into the Deity. This does not appear to be a very satisfactory interpretation. To take a parallel case: Suppose that the Pacha of Egypt, a country once superior in knowledge to the nations of Europe, but now sunk far below them, were to appropriate a sum for the purpose “of reviving and promoting literature, and encouraging learned natives of Egypt,” would any body infer that he meant the youth of his Pachalik to give years to the study of hieroglyphics, to search into all the doctrines disguised under the fable of Osiris, and to ascertain with all possible accuracy the ritual with which cats and onions were anciently adored? Would he be justly charged with inconsistency if, instead of employing his young subjects in deciphering obelisks, he were to order them to be instructed in the English and French languages, and in all the sciences to which those languages are the chief keys?
 The words on which the supporters of the old system rely do not bear them out, and other words follow which seem to be quite decisive on the other side. This lakh of rupees is set apart not only for “reviving literature in India,” the phrase on which their whole interpretation is founded, but also “for the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories”– words which are alone sufficient to authorize all the changes for which I contend.
 If the Council agree in my construction no legislative act will be necessary. If they differ from me, I will propose a short act rescinding that I clause of the Charter of 1813 from which the difficulty arises.
 The argument which I have been considering affects only the form of proceeding. But the admirers of the oriental system of education have used another argument, which, if we admit it to be valid, is decisive against all change. They conceive that the public faith is pledged to the present system, and that to alter the appropriation of any of the funds which have hitherto been spent in encouraging the study of Arabic and Sanscrit would be downright spoliation. It is not easy to understand by what process of reasoning they can have arrived at this conclusion. The grants which are made from the public purse for the encouragement of literature differ in no respect from the grants which are made from the same purse for other objects of real or supposed utility. We found a sanitarium on a spot which we suppose to be healthy. Do we thereby pledge ourselves to keep a sanitarium there if the result should not answer our expectations? We commence the erection of a pier. Is it a violation of the public faith to stop the works, if we afterwards see reason to believe that the building will be useless? The rights of property are undoubtedly sacred. But nothing endangers those rights so much as the practice, now unhappily too common, of attributing them to things to which they do not belong. Those who would impart to abuses the sanctity of property are in truth imparting to the institution of property the unpopularity and the fragility of abuses. If the Government has given to any person a formal assurance– nay, if the Government has excited in any person’s mind a reasonable expectation– that he shall receive a certain income as a teacher or a learner of Sanscrit or Arabic, I would respect that person’s pecuniary interests. I would rather err on the side of liberality to individuals than suffer the public faith to be called in question. But to talk of a Government pledging itself to teach certain languages and certain sciences, though those languages may become useless, though those sciences may be exploded, seems to me quite unmeaning. There is not a single word in any public instrument from which it can be inferred that the Indian Government ever intended to give any pledge on this subject, or ever considered the destination of these funds as unalterably fixed. But, had it been otherwise, I should have denied the competence of our predecessors to bind us by any pledge on such a subject. Suppose that a Government had in the last century enacted in the most solemn manner that all its subjects should, to the end of time, be inoculated for the small-pox, would that Government be bound to persist in the practice after Jenner’s discovery? These promises of which nobody claims the performance, and from which nobody can grant a release, these vested rights which vest in nobody, this property without proprietors, this robbery which makes nobody poorer, may be comprehended by persons of higher faculties than mine. I consider this plea merely as a set form of words, regularly used both in England and in India, in defence of every abuse for which no other plea can be set up.
 I hold this lakh of rupees to be quite at the disposal of the Governor-General in Council for the purpose of promoting learning in India in any way which may be thought most advisable. I hold his Lordship to be quite as free to direct that it shall no longer be employed in encouraging Arabic and Sanscrit, as he is to direct that the reward for killing tigers in Mysore shall be diminished, or that no more public money shall be expended on the chaunting at the cathedral.
 We now come to the gist of the matter. We have a fund to be employed as Government shall direct for the intellectual improvement of the people of this country. The simple question is, what is the most useful way of employing it?
 All parties seem to be agreed on one point, that the dialects commonly spoken among the natives of this part of India contain neither literary nor scientific information, and are moreover so poor and rude that, until they are enriched from some other quarter, it will not be easy to translate any valuable work into them. It seems to be admitted on all sides, that the intellectual improvement of those classes of the people who have the means of pursuing higher studies can at present be affected only by means of some language not vernacular amongst them.
 What then shall that language be? One-half of the committee maintain that it should be the English. The other half strongly recommend the Arabic and Sanscrit. The whole question seems to me to be– which language is the best worth knowing?
 I have no knowledge of either Sanscrit or Arabic. But I have done what I could to form a correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanscrit works. I have conversed, both here and at home, with men distinguished by their proficiency in the Eastern tongues. I am quite ready to take the oriental learning at the valuation of the orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia. The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is indeed fully admitted by those members of the committee who support the oriental plan of education.
 It will hardly be disputed, I suppose, that the department of literature in which the Eastern writers stand highest is poetry. And I certainly never met with any orientalist who ventured to maintain that the Arabic and Sanscrit poetry could be compared to that of the great European nations. But when we pass from works of imagination to works in which facts are recorded and general principles investigated, the superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable. It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written in the Sanscrit language is less valuable than what may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at preparatory schools in England. In every branch of physical or moral philosophy, the relative position of the two nations is nearly the same.
 How then stands the case? We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated by means of their mother-tongue. We must teach them some foreign language. The claims of our own language it is hardly necessary to recapitulate. It stands pre-eminent even among the languages of the West. It abounds with works of imagination not inferior to the noblest which Greece has bequeathed to us, –with models of every species of eloquence, –with historical composition, which, considered merely as narratives, have seldom been surpassed, and which, considered as vehicles of ethical and political instruction, have never been equaled– with just and lively representations of human life and human nature, –with the most profound speculations on metaphysics, morals, government, jurisprudence, trade, –with full and correct information respecting every experimental science which tends to preserve the health, to increase the comfort, or to expand the intellect of man. Whoever knows that language has ready access to all the vast intellectual wealth which all the wisest nations of the earth have created and hoarded in the course of ninety generations. It may safely be said that the literature now extant in that language is of greater value than all the literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the languages of the world together. Nor is this all. In India, English is the language spoken by the ruling class. It is spoken by the higher class of natives at the seats of Government. It is likely to become the language of commerce throughout the seas of the East. It is the language of two great European communities which are rising, the one in the south of Africa, the other in Australia, –communities which are every year becoming more important and more closely connected with our Indian empire. Whether we look at the intrinsic value of our literature, or at the particular situation of this country, we shall see the strongest reason to think that, of all foreign tongues, the English tongue is that which would be the most useful to our native subjects.
 The question now before us is simply whether, when it is in our power to teach this language, we shall teach languages in which, by universal confession, there are no books on any subject which deserve to be compared to our own, whether, when we can teach European science, we shall teach systems which, by universal confession, wherever they differ from those of Europe differ for the worse, and whether, when we can patronize sound philosophy and true history, we shall countenance, at the public expense, medical doctrines which would disgrace an English farrier, astronomy which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school, history abounding with kings thirty feet high and reigns thirty thousand years long, and geography made of seas of treacle and seas of butter.
 We are not without experience to guide us. History furnishes several analogous cases, and they all teach the same lesson. There are, in modern times, to go no further, two memorable instances of a great impulse given to the mind of a whole society, of prejudices overthrown, of knowledge diffused, of taste purified, of arts and sciences planted in countries which had recently been ignorant and barbarous.
 The first instance to which I refer is the great revival of letters among the Western nations at the close of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century. At that time almost everything that was worth reading was contained in the writings of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Had our ancestors acted as the Committee of Public Instruction has hitherto noted, had they neglected the language of Thucydides and Plato, and the language of Cicero and Tacitus, had they confined their attention to the old dialects of our own island, had they printed nothing and taught nothing at the universities but chronicles in Anglo-Saxon and romances in Norman French, –would England ever have been what she now is? What the Greek and Latin were to the contemporaries of More and Ascham, our tongue is to the people of India. The literature of England is now more valuable than that of classical antiquity. I doubt whether the Sanscrit literature be as valuable as that of our Saxon and Norman progenitors. In some departments– in history for example– I am certain that it is much less so.
 Another instance may be said to be still before our eyes. Within the last hundred and twenty years, a nation which had previously been in a state as barbarous as that in which our ancestors were before the Crusades has gradually emerged from the ignorance in which it was sunk, and has taken its place among civilized communities. I speak of Russia. There is now in that country a large educated class abounding with persons fit to serve the State in the highest functions, and in nowise inferior to the most accomplished men who adorn the best circles of Paris and London. There is reason to hope that this vast empire which, in the time of our grandfathers, was probably behind the Punjab, may in the time of our grandchildren, be pressing close on France and Britain in the career of improvement. And how was this change effected? Not by flattering national prejudices; not by feeding the mind of the young Muscovite with the old women’s stories which his rude fathers had believed; not by filling his head with lying legends about St. Nicholas; not by encouraging him to study the great question, whether the world was or not created on the 13th of September; not by calling him “a learned native” when he had mastered all these points of knowledge; but by teaching him those foreign languages in which the greatest mass of information had been laid up, and thus putting all that information within his reach. The languages of western Europe civilised Russia. I cannot doubt that they will do for the Hindoo what they have done for the Tartar.  And what are the arguments against that course which seems to be alike recommended by theory and by experience? It is said that we ought to secure the co-operation of the native public, and that we can do this only by teaching Sanscrit and Arabic.  I can by no means admit that, when a nation of high intellectual attainments undertakes to superintend the education of a nation comparatively ignorant, the learners are absolutely to prescribe the course which is to be taken by the teachers. It is not necessary however to say anything on this subject. For it is proved by unanswerable evidence, that we are not at present securing the co-operation of the natives. It would be bad enough to consult their intellectual taste at the expense of their intellectual health. But we are consulting neither. We are withholding from them the learning which is palatable to them. We are forcing on them the mock learning which they nauseate.  This is proved by the fact that we are forced to pay our Arabic and Sanscrit students while those who learn English are willing to pay us. All the declamations in the world about the love and reverence of the natives for their sacred dialects will never, in the mind of any impartial person, outweigh this undisputed fact, that we cannot find in all our vast empire a single student who will let us teach him those dialects, unless we will pay him.  I have now before me the accounts of the Mudrassa for one month, the month of December, 1833. The Arabic students appear to have been seventy-seven in number. All receive stipends from the public. The whole amount paid to them is above 500 rupees a month. On the other side of the account stands the following item: Deduct amount realized from the out-students of English for the months of May, June, and July last– 103 rupees.  I have been told that it is merely from want of local experience that I am surprised at these phenomena, and that it is not the fashion for students in India to study at their own charges. This only confirms me in my opinions. Nothing is more certain than that it never can in any part of the world be necessary to pay men for doing what they think pleasant or profitable. India is no exception to this rule. The people of India do not require to be paid for eating rice when they are hungry, or for wearing woollen cloth in the cold season. To come nearer to the case before us: –The children who learn their letters and a little elementary arithmetic from the village schoolmaster are not paid by him. He is paid for teaching them. Why then is it necessary to pay people to learn Sanscrit and Arabic? Evidently because it is universally felt that the Sanscrit and Arabic are languages the knowledge of which does not compensate for the trouble of acquiring them. On all such subjects the state of the market is the detective test.  Other evidence is not wanting, if other evidence were required. A petition was presented last year to the committee by several ex-students of the Sanscrit College. The petitioners stated that they had studied in the college ten or twelve years, that they had made themselves acquainted with Hindoo literature and science, that they had received certificates of proficiency. And what is the fruit of all this? “Notwithstanding such testimonials,” they say, “we have but little prospect of bettering our condition without the kind assistance of your honourable committee, the indifference with which we are generally looked upon by our countrymen leaving no hope of encouragement and assistance from them.” They therefore beg that they may be recommended to the Governor-General for places under the Government– not places of high dignity or emolument, but such as may just enable them to exist. “We want means,” they say, “for a decent living, and for our progressive improvement, which, however, we cannot obtain without the assistance of Government, by whom we have been educated and maintained from childhood.” They conclude by representing very pathetically that they are sure that it was never the intention of Government, after behaving so liberally to them during their education, to abandon them to destitution and neglect.  I have been used to see petitions to Government for compensation. All those petitions, even the most unreasonable of them, proceeded on the supposition that some loss had been sustained, that some wrong had been inflicted. These are surely the first petitioners who ever demanded compensation for having been educated gratis, for having been supported by the public during twelve years, and then sent forth into the world well furnished with literature and science. They represent their education as an injury which gives them a claim on the Government for redress, as an injury for which the stipends paid to them during the infliction were a very inadequate compensation. And I doubt not that they are in the right. They have wasted the best years of life in learning what procures for them neither bread nor respect. Surely we might with advantage have saved the cost of making these persons useless and miserable. Surely, men may be brought up to be burdens to the public and objects of contempt to their neighbours at a somewhat smaller charge to the State. But such is our policy. We do not even stand neuter in the contest between truth and falsehood. We are not content to leave the natives to the influence of their own hereditary prejudices. To the natural difficulties which obstruct the progress of sound science in the East, we add great difficulties of our own making. Bounties and premiums, such as ought not to be given even for the propagation of truth, we lavish on false texts and false philosophy.  By acting thus we create the very evil which we fear. We are making that opposition which we do not find. What we spend on the Arabic and Sanscrit Colleges is not merely a dead loss to the cause of truth. It is bounty-money paid to raise up champions of error. It goes to form a nest not merely of helpless placehunters but of bigots prompted alike by passion and by interest to raise a cry against every useful scheme of education. If there should be any opposition among the natives to the change which I recommend, that opposition will be the effect of our own system. It will be headed by persons supported by our stipends and trained in our colleges. The longer we persevere in our present course, the more formidable will that opposition be. It will be every year reinforced by recruits whom we are paying. From the native society, left to itself, we have no difficulties to apprehend. All the murmuring will come from that oriental interest which we have, by artificial means, called into being and nursed into strength.  There is yet another fact which is alone sufficient to prove that the feeling of the native public, when left to itself, is not such as the supporters of the old system represent it to be. The committee have thought fit to lay out above a lakh of rupees in printing Arabic and Sanscrit books. Those books find no purchasers. It is very rarely that a single copy is disposed of. Twenty-three thousand volumes, most of them folios and quartos, fill the libraries or rather the lumber-rooms of this body. The committee contrive to get rid of some portion of their vast stock of oriental literature by giving books away. But they cannot give so fast as they print. About twenty thousand rupees a year are spent in adding fresh masses of waste paper to a hoard which, one should think, is already sufficiently ample. During the last three years about sixty thousand rupees have been expended in this manner. The sale of Arabic and Sanscrit books during those three years has not yielded quite one thousand rupees. In the meantime, the School Book Society is selling seven or eight thousand English volumes every year, and not only pays the expenses of printing but realizes a profit of twenty per cent. on its outlay.  The fact that the Hindoo law is to be learned chiefly from Sanscrit books, and the Mahometan law from Arabic books, has been much insisted on, but seems not to bear at all on the question. We are commanded by Parliament to ascertain and digest the laws of India. The assistance of a Law Commission has been given to us for that purpose. As soon as the Code is promulgated the Shasters and the Hedaya will be useless to a moonsiff or a Sudder Ameen. I hope and trust that, before the boys who are now entering at the Mudrassa and the Sanscrit College have completed their studies, this great work will be finished. It would be manifestly absurd to educate the rising generation with a view to a state of things which we mean to alter before they reach manhood.  But there is yet another argument which seems even more untenable. It is said that the Sanscrit and the Arabic are the languages in which the sacred books of a hundred millions of people are written, and that they are on that account entitled to peculiar encouragement. Assuredly it is the duty of the British Government in India to be not only tolerant but neutral on all religious questions. But to encourage the study of a literature, admitted to be of small intrinsic value, only because that literature inculcated the most serious errors on the most important subjects, is a course hardly reconcilable with reason, with morality, or even with that very neutrality which ought, as we all agree, to be sacredly preserved. It is confined that a language is barren of useful knowledge. We are to teach it because it is fruitful of monstrous superstitions. We are to teach false history, false astronomy, false medicine, because we find them in company with a false religion. We abstain, and I trust shall always abstain, from giving any public encouragement to those who are engaged in the work of converting the natives to Christianity. And while we act thus, can we reasonably or decently bribe men, out of the revenues of the State, to waste their youth in learning how they are to purify themselves after touching an ass or what texts of the Vedas they are to repeat to expiate the crime of killing a goat?  It is taken for granted by the advocates of oriental learning that no native of this country can possibly attain more than a mere smattering of English. They do not attempt to prove this. But they perpetually insinuate it. They designate the education which their opponents recommend as a mere spelling-book education. They assume it as undeniable that the question is between a profound knowledge of Hindoo and Arabian literature and science on the one side, and superficial knowledge of the rudiments of English on the other. This is not merely an assumption, but an assumption contrary to all reason and experience. We know that foreigners of all nations do learn our language sufficiently to have access to all the most abstruse knowledge which it contains sufficiently to relish even the more delicate graces of our most idiomatic writers. There are in this very town natives who are quite competent to discuss political or scientific questions with fluency and precision in the English language. I have heard the very question on which I am now writing discussed by native gentlemen with a liberality and an intelligence which would do credit to any member of the Committee of Public Instruction. Indeed it is unusual to find, even in the literary circles of the Continent, any foreigner who can express himself in English with so much facility and correctness as we find in many Hindoos. Nobody, I suppose, will contend that English is so difficult to a Hindoo as Greek to an Englishman. Yet an intelligent English youth, in a much smaller number of years than our unfortunate pupils pass at the Sanscrit College, becomes able to read, to enjoy, and even to imitate not unhappily the compositions of the best Greek authors. Less than half the time which enables an English youth to read Herodotus and Sophocles ought to enable a Hindoo to read Hume and Milton.  To sum up what I have said. I think it clear that we are not fettered by the Act of Parliament of 1813, that we are not fettered by any pledge expressed or implied, that we are free to employ our funds as we choose, that we ought to employ them in teaching what is best worth knowing, that English is better worth knowing than Sanscrit or Arabic, that the natives are desirous to be taught English, and are not desirous to be taught Sanscrit or Arabic, that neither as the languages of law nor as the languages of religion have the Sanscrit and Arabic any peculiar claim to our encouragement, that it is possible to make natives of this country thoroughly good English scholars, and that to this end our efforts ought to be directed.  In one point I fully agree with the gentlemen to whose general views I am opposed. I feel with them that it is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern, –a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population.  I would strictly respect all existing interests. I would deal even generously with all individuals who have had fair reason to expect a pecuniary provision. But I would strike at the root of the bad system which has hitherto been fostered by us. I would at once stop the printing of Arabic and Sanscrit books. I would abolish the Mudrassa and the Sanscrit College at Calcutta. Benares is the great seat of Brahminical learning; Delhi of Arabic learning. If we retain the Sanscrit College at Bonares and the Mahometan College at Delhi we do enough and much more than enough in my opinion, for the Eastern languages. If the Benares and Delhi Colleges should be retained, I would at least recommend that no stipends shall be given to any students who may hereafter repair thither, but that the people shall be left to make their own choice between the rival systems of education without being bribed by us to learn what they have no desire to know. The funds which would thus be placed at our disposal would enable us to give larger encouragement to the Hindoo College at Calcutta, and establish in the principal cities throughout the Presidencies of Fort William and Agra schools in which the English language might be well and thoroughly taught.  If the decision of His Lordship in Council should be such as I anticipate, I shall enter on the performance of my duties with the greatest zeal and alacrity. If, on the other hand, it be the opinion of the Government that the present system ought to remain unchanged, I beg that I may be permitted to retire from the chair of the Committee. I feel that I could not be of the smallest use there. I feel also that I should be lending my countenance to what I firmly believe to be a mere delusion. I believe that the present system tends not to accelerate the progress of truth but to delay the natural death of expiring errors. I conceive that we have at present no right to the respectable name of a Board of Public Instruction. We are a Board for wasting the public money, for printing books which are of less value than the paper on which they are printed was while it was blank– for giving artificial encouragement to absurd history, absurd metaphysics, absurd physics, absurd theology– for raising up a breed of scholars who find their scholarship an incumbrance and blemish, who live on the public while they are receiving their education, and whose education is so utterly useless to them that, when they have received it, they must either starve or live on the public all the rest of their lives. Entertaining these opinions, I am naturally desirous to decline all share in the responsibility of a body which, unless it alters its whole mode of proceedings, I must consider, not merely as useless, but as positively noxious. T[homas] B[abington] MACAULAY 2nd February 1835. I give my entire concurrence to the sentiments expressed in this Minute. W[illiam] C[avendish] BENTINCK.
From: Bureau of Education. Selections from Educational Records, Part I (1781-1839). Edited by H. Sharp. Calcutta: Superintendent, Government Printing, 1920. Reprint. Delhi: National Archives of India, 1965, 107-117.
Source : Columbia University Website