Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain: Leading educationist, author and champion of women's rights in undivided India

An author and educationist who opened the famous school for girls more than a century ago, Begum Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain, is one of the most inspiring women and a role model in the sub-continent. 

Rokeya Sakhawat Hossain was a multi-faceted personality who was champion of women's rights and a writer. 

In fact, she wrote extensively and left two volumes that has collections of her essays apart from a famous novel. 

She dreamt of a world where women were at the top--working as scientists, flying aircrafts, running universities and taking stand against war. 

Talking about her achievements, just remember the era she belongs to--she was born before Maulana Azad and Jawahar Lal Nehru. She presided over education conference, organised women, opened the school that runs in Kolkata till today [now run by the State government]. 

After marriage, her husband had fully backed her and she learnt English. Begum Rokeya had gone from house to house, urging women to send their daughters to school. She attended conclaves and conferences, even presided over Indian Women's Conference.

Her life is a shining example of how a woman in that era, worked hard for emancipation of women. She died in 1932, at the age of just 52. She was buried in Sodepur in North 24 Parganas in West Bengal, India. She was born in undivided India and she is a hero in Bangladesh too. BBC's poll had her listed at sixth place. 

She was born in Rangpur. Her birth and death anniversary fall on December 9, and hence it is termed as Rokeya Day. Great women leaders who led in social, educational fields, wrote & stirred people apart from literary output, pathbreaking work on the ground, must be remembered. 

Photo courtesy: Pirganj Kasimon Nessa Girls' High School, Pirganj, Rangpur [Facebook page]

Transfer of population was complete in Punjab during partition: Muslim exodus and arrival of Hindus, Sikhs but not in Bengal

Shams Ur Rehman Alavi

Partition of India was a tragedy, one of the biggest manmade disasters that changed geography and caused suffering to millions. 

Tens of lakhs had to leave their homes with family and belongings, and had to go to the other side of the border. Innumerable people were killed on way. 

Two big regions--Punjab and Bengal, were affected but in a different way. 

Both states had people with a common culture and language. Yet, there were mass killings in Punjab that resulted in large-scale migration. However, this didn't happen to such a scale in Bengal.

Undivided Punjab or Greater Punjab was a huge region. Such was the level of displacement that entire cities and towns were transformed. The exodus was up to the level of villages, each and every place in Punjab. 

So lakhs of people from each district left to the other side of the border. This was unprecedented. Lahore and other cities in Western Punjab too witnessed similar exodus. Muslims left from Eastern Punjab and went to Pakistan, Hindus and Sikhs left their homeland in Western Punjab and came to India. 

Except Mewat region, the town of Maler Kotla and a small pocket like Kadian, there was no place that had any sizable concentration of Muslims left in Indian Punjab, after partition. Haryana and Chandigarh were carved out of Punjab, later, and earlier they were part of greater Punjab state.

For example, Ludhiana had more than 3 lakh Muslims in the district before partition. However, after independence, barely a few hundreds remained in the city, and a couple of thousand spread in some rural parts. 

SCALE OF VIOLENCE, KILLINGS LED TO MIGRATION IN PUNJAB, BUT NOT IN BENGAL

In sharp contrast, Bengal, another huge province, that was too was divided like Punjab, had a different story. The scale of migration was not such. In fact, large Hindu population remained in Eastern Pakistan, and to this day they remain in Bangladesh.

Also, Muslims remained in Murshidabad, Malda as well as Purnea and Kolkata. Partition caused huge turmoil in North India. People went from Uttar Pradesh (UP), Delhi and Rajasthan-Madhya Pradesh, also. But the situation of Punjab was altogether different.

The violence and killings in Punjab had no parallel. This fear for their lives, drove people to leave their homes. The communal temperature was high in Punjab that had three major religions. Arya Samaj had Shuddhi movement were strong, here. 

Parties and their strong organisations had responsibility at grassroots. The role of Congress workers also needs to be remembered. Besides, the part played by the press in Punjab in dividing people among religions lines, is another aspect. 

Bengal too had frictions but the level of communalism was not as high among a common Bengali. Perhaps, there was greater cultural affinity too between the communities. Seven decades later, the partition of India, the killings, displacement and its impact, continue to haunt us. Have we learnt any lessons? 

[The figure is not to scale and does not claim to represent geographical boundaries. It is just for illustrative purpose. This is an old, pre-independence map and is just for representation and educational purpose.]

Historical maps of India: Political map of British India, pre-partition India that included Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma in Urdu, English

This is an old map, more than a century old.

The map shows boundaries that existed much before partition of the Indian sub-continent.

It shows British India that included not just India, Pakistan but also Burma.

Urdu has been added in the map for the benefit of readers, students who need it.

Many such maps are needed in Urdu but are not available. Hence, this is our aim to add Urdu in important maps. It is purely for education purpose. 

A lot has changed in 110 years. Many cities shown in the map, shrank and hence they are not considered big cities now, but are shown in this map.

Similarly, regions and divisions that existed earlier but later they became part of other states and hence their separate identity no longer exists. You find regions like Berar, Mysore and Hyderabad. Now Mysore and Hyderabad are not states but mere cities, as states were renamed and reorganised after independence.

The map is large but couldn't be uploaded on that scale here. However, you can still click and then use F11 for a slightly bigger map. Original size would be posted later on. Once again, it must be known that it is for education purpose, no commercial use. 

The figure is not to scale and does not claim to represent any authentic boundaries, just for illustrative purpose. See the second map that is in higher resolution. Yet another map of pre-independent India is available at this link. CLICK. [We are going to post many such maps in future for the benefit of Urdu speaking masses and students].  

America yet to elect first women president in 230 years, Asian countries chose female heads of states long back: Why no Women Prez in United States so far?

It has taken 230 years. America has seen 45 presidents in history.
 
But not a single woman head of state, till now.

That's strange, isn't it?

In a few weeks, results would be known and we will know if United States of America (USA) is going to have a new President. The contest between two men, once again.

And, no woman in sight, as yet. In the last elections, there was a chance.

In fact, Hillary Clinton was expected to get elected, but ultimately Donald Trump became the president.

Compared to the 'progressive' USA, countries in other parts of the world, Asia, Africa, Europe and Oceania have elected many women head of states including Presidents or Prime Ministers.

Today, Europe has Chancellor Angela Merkel in Germany and there was Theresa May in Britain, till sometime ago. However, in Asian countries--Hindu, Buddhist and Muslim nations, there is a long history of popular women leaders who led their countries.

Srimavo Bhandarayaka was the former Prime Minister of Sri Lanka [Ceylone]. Indira Gandhi was, of course, Prime Minister of India, for so long. Benazir Bhutto, the former PM of Pakistan, was a charismatic leader. Tansu Ciller was Prime Minister of Turkey.

Bangladesh has the best record of electing female leaders. The contest has been between Sheikh Hasina Wajid and Begum Khaleda Zia. Both of them have been PMs in the country. Among the initial women leaders was Golda Meir, the former PM of Israel.

One of the most well-known women politicians to lead a country was Margaret Thatcher in UK. There have been many more names. It is surprising that America hasn't had woman president before or even a serious contender. This is surprising because countries where women empowerment is believed to be far less and where literacy among females is quite less, have had female leaders. Sylvie Kinigi was acting president in Burundi (Africa) and later women leaders were elected in other parts of Africa too.

Branding the Bangladeshi migrants as terrorists: Illegal immigration or a humanitarian crisis of displacement due to poverty and unemployment?

Am I hated because I am poor?

In the wake of the Jaipur blasts the entire nation is still sad and our hearts go out to the families who have lost their members in this madness.

We don't know who the real perpetrators are and in most of the recent cases of bomb blasts, the police haven't been able to catch the culprits.

But there is a clamour for deporting all the Bangladeshi migrants. Earlier, we used to hear names like Jaish, Lashkar and Hizbul Mujahideen. 


Now, with India and Pakistan cosying up, the name of Bangladesh-based HuJi is the first organisation on which the needle of suspicion is pointed after such an activity.

But should the entire Bangladeshi populace be blamed for this? The politicians are the first to create the hysteria. How can so many Bangladeshis be deported for the wrong-doing of a few persons and even this is not clear if the Bangladeshis were indeed responsible.

Aren't they humans? Is it just because they are poor? And is it urban India's prejudice and contempt for the poor that gets manifested in such demands. They are human beings, who toil hard to earn their bread.
 
BLAME THE POOR

In urban India, it is quite common to hear that yeh jhuggi jhopdi wale' (sic), as if those who live in slums are responsible for every menace including petty crimes and making the cities look ugly. 

The same upwardly middle-class and upper-class that can't manage without a domestic help and whose household comes at a standstill is the first to blame them for every ill, just because they are poor.

Barely a couple of days week, a girl Arushi Talwar was murdered in Noida and the murder mystery is yet to be cracked. But initially every channel and paper screamed, 'Nepali servant suspected to the killer' (and not that 'Servant suspected to be the killer').

HATE THE 'OUTSIDER' SYNDROME

Why it has to be a Nepali? Couldn't they have just said it, 'servant' or 'domestic help'. The word Nepali shouldn't have been used. But did anybody object? It is clearly racist and in no civilised society, it ought to be allowed to paint an entire group as criminal.

Is it that he was 'the other', an outsider and more so, a poor person. Later it was found that he was also murdered along with Arushi.

This reflects the hollowness of our society. Are all Nepalis criminals? Or, all Bangladeshis terrorists? Of course, the latter are mostly Muslims and have a different religion, which makes them even more an anathema for a large section of populace.

If Bangladeshis are infiltrating and living illegally, there should be a proper policy or they should be identified and given work permits, licences and allowed to live here. But you can't treat a poor person in this way just because he is desperate to feed his family and comes this far to eke out a living.

We all know that India is a target of terrorists. They attack mosques and temples, they kill Hindus and Muslims and Sikhs and Christians alike. And they ought to be caught. But that should happen. Unfortunately we don't see the real culprits arrested. We just hear jingoistic rhetoric and hysteria.

WHERE WAS MR ADVANI BORN?

And who asks for the deportation? India's former deputy prime minister Lal Kishenchand Advani, who himself had left the land of his birth [now Pakistan] came to this country! Unfortunately the fiery speeches do little to help anybody's case or nab the culpirts.

In 1984, two guys killed Indira Gandhi and we had statements like 'A tree falls, tremors are felt' that gave virtual license to mob to kill innocent Sikhs. We must not lose sanity. A story 'The Usual Suspects' in The Daily Star of Bangladesh written by Naeem Mohaiemen starts with the quote:

"They let us cook rice-daal for them, let us raise their children, trust us with the keys to house-home-jewelry. And then they turn around and vote for people who call us terrorists and want to cut us into pieces and bury us inside the ground." -- Bangladeshi taxi driver in Delhi.

GROSS GENERALISATIONS

Round up the usual suspects. Calling Abdul, Rahman, Rahim, Karim, Salim. All you "illegal" Bangladeshi immigrants within our borders. Report to the newest detention centers. It's not who you say you are, it's what we say you are.

Bangladesh has emerged as the all-purpose "Nondo Ghosh" [joto dosh] for Indian intelligence agencies. Attack on train station? Defused bombs? Bicycle bombs? Bag bombs? It must be the ultra-efficient, tentacle-spreading spectre of "terrorist organisations based in Bangladesh."

There is enough to write on the issue. We, Indians, also go to other countries looking for jobs. I think there has been enough of hysteria. There must be a proper system to deal with unchecked migration--either permit system or certain other visa.

The situation is similar in Assam, where every Muslim, even those speaking Bengali and ethnic Assamese, are termed as foreigners and outsiders or 'settlers'. But poor can't be termed criminals and exploited. We must understand the humanitarian aspect. That's all I want to say for the moment. 

READ: Bangla migrant Vs Nepali immigrant, propaganda, passion and perception in India

Bangla migrant Vs Nepali migrant: Bangladeshi is foreigner, Nepali immigrant is welcome in India?

No to Bangladesh (Left), Yes to Nepal (Right)

A recent Delhi-based English newspapers editorial on the issue of migrants' influx is thought-provoking.

The entire nation and politicians cutting across the party lines have made the issue of Bangladeshis' influx as the biggest threat to India.

Strangely, the Marxists are also crying hoarse like the right-wing groups and the BJP that always did it in the past over this issue.

The communalization of Indian politics is so intense that on one hand the country has open border with Nepal, the entry of Bangladeshi migrant who is culturally more closer to India is a strict no-no.

Lakhs of Nepalese citizens enter India every year just because Nepal is a Hindu country? Though culturally, it was not a part of India. It was a separate kingdom. 

But Bangladesh [that was just 57 years ago part of India], is a Muslim country and is it the reason that the migrants from this country are unwelcome.

What the Bangla migrant does? He mingles easily and lives peacefully. On the other hand, even if a man from Nepal is involved in an offence, there is no anger against the entire group. But in case of Bangladesh, if a man is even termed 'Bangladeshi', is is used as a derogatory term in media.

Had there been even a couple of incidents of crime by Bangla migrants, the national media would have made a great hue and cry. The Bangladeshis and the West Bengal residents share same language, culture and traditions. 

They were a unified race that was divided. It was the British administration that once tried to divide Bengal in 1905. Barely 42 years later, the British again chose to cut Bengal, with the assent of the leaders of Congress as well as other parties.

Of course, that's history. But, as long as Hindus came to India from Bangladesh, it was not made an issue. The settlements of Bangladeshi Hindus through out the India are reminder to the fact but now the Bangladeshi has been labelled as troublemaker.

The difference between figures of immigrants, is huge. In fact, there is a clear exaggeration about claims regarding figures of Muslims from Bangladesh, and the constant rhetoric that Muslim immigrants are arriving purposely to affect religious demography of West Bengal.

These claims have been repeated so many times on a regular basis for years, that it has got into the minds of citizens. Certain people at the top positions, made wild guesses in order to create panic among Hindu population, that the arrival of Bangladeshis...

...would increase the proportion of Muslims, so dramatically, that it would affect the population balance. Actually, it's a form of hate. Demonizing a country and people is not fair. Besides, rather than taking it up seriously and at bilateral level, the chest thumping and hatred on display, affects our image & relations.

In Assam, we have similar issue that keeps raging perennially. Read an exhaustive post on the same issue that was written later on this blog. The article, 'Branding the Bangladeshi migrant as terrorist: Illegal immigration or a humanitarian crisis', is related.