After thirteen long years of military dictatorship, national
elections on the basis of adult franchise were held in Pakistan in
December 1970. The Awami League, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and the
Pakistan Peoples Party, under Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, emerged as the two
majority political parties in East Pakistan and West Pakistan
respectively. The political party commanding a majority in one wing of
the country had almost no following in the other. This ended in a
political and constitutional deadlock, since this split mandate and
political exclusiveness gradually led to the parting of ways and
political polarization. Power was not transferred to the majority party
(that is, the Awami League) within the legally prescribed time; instead,
in the wake of the political/ constitutional crisis, a civil war broke
out in East Pakistan which soon led to an open war between India and
Pakistan in December 1971. This ultimately resulted in the dismemberment
of Pakistan, and in the creation of Bangladesh as a sovereign country.
The book under review is a political study of the causes and
consequences of this crisis and the war, based on a reconstruction of
the real facts, historical events, political processes and developments.
It candidly recapitulates the respective roles of the political elites
(both of India and Pakistan), their leaders and governments, and
assesses their perceptions of the real situation. It is an absorbing
narrative of almost thirteen months, from 7 December, 1970, when
elections were held in Pakistan, to 17 December, 1971 when the war ended
after the Pakistani army's surrender to the Indian army in Dhaka (on
December 16, 1971). The authors, who are trained political scientists,
give fresh interpretations of these historical events and processes and
relate them to the broader regional and global issues, thus assessing
the crisis in a broader perspective. This change of perspective enhances
our understanding of the problems the authors discuss. Their focus on
the problems under discussion is sharp, cogent, enlightening, and
circumspect, whether or not the reader agrees with their conclusions.
The grasp of the source material is masterly; their narration of
fast-moving political events is superbly anchored in their scientific
methodology and political philosophy.
When Does Income Inequality Cause Polarization?