India's Attack on Pakistan
Speech at a Public Meeting at Mochi Gate, Lahore,
March 8, 1970

I am extremely grateful to you for coming here to hear me speak. You will remember that about a year ago 1 had said here that dictatorship can no longer remain in Pakistan. So the people of Pakistan have defeated dictatorship, and if anyone ever tries to reimpose it, we will launch a struggle against him. When the anti-Ayub movement was on, some people thought it was difficult to topple Ayub Khan's dictatorship for he had at his disposal all government officers, military, police, capitalists, feudalists, Basic Democrats and a big political party, which has now been split into three parts, plus, of course, the radio, television and the press. Some people thought no one could dethrone Ayub's government as long as he was alive.

Ayub Khan wanted to make his son the President after him, but as you have seen, the peasants, labourers, students, and other sections of society launched a great movement against Ayub Khan and his dictatorship, against corruption, oppression and bureaucracy, as a result of which he had to relinquish power. The success of the popular movement, like the one we launched and won, has few parallels.

Generally military dictatorship is dethroned by a military revolution. But our country has been an exception. The credit for ending dictatorship goes to our people, and they deserve all the tributes that can be paid to them. Nevertheless the People's Party made a contribution to the struggle to dislodge dictatorship and this is known to all.

You will recall that in my speech in Hyderabad on 21 September 1968, I said that the people had turned against the dictatorship of Ayub Khan, that one last push together would topple over his edifice. It was your victory. In your victory the role of the People's Party was not insignificant. When the movement against Ayub Khan's despotism was at its height, and Ayub Khan sensed the danger, he proposed a Round Table Conference. It was a big conspiracy against the people's movement. I had then said that Ayub Khan should talk to the politicians openly rather than behind closed doors. I don't believe in closed-door politics. I believe in politics in the open. That is why I had said in Lahore that the people alone were my round table conference. I had advised my politician friends not to talk to Ayub Khan for it was he who first sent them to jail, and was now manoeuvring for a Round Table Conference with them. But these people very submissively participated in the Conference which was a big conspiracy against the people.

My dear friends, our politics was confined behind closed doors after the deaths of the Quaid-i-Azam and Liaquat Ali Khan. Why did our politi­cians become members of the second Constituent Assembly when Governor General Ghulam Mohammad had undemocratically dissolved the first one? I promise to you that the Pakistan People's Party will end politics behind closed doors and introduce in the country, the politics of the people.

It is extremely deplorable that the country's political and economic problems have not been settled during the last 23 years. The reason is that the people have never been consulted on any problem. Only a few politi­cians and capitalists had the monopoly over each and every thing. But let it be known that from now on the people alone will take all decisions. The elections are to be held soon. The people's problems have not as yet been solved, for there have been no real elections so far in this country.

My dear friends and fellow-workers, the people come to my meetings because I tell the truth. I am not a hypocrite. I have given the country an independent foreign policy. I have served my country and have successfully confronted the enemy with the help of the people. I have defeated dictatorship. My party has given the people a manifesto and an economic programme in accordance with their wishes and aspirations. Therefore the people will continue coming to my meetings, Insha Allah.

One of the 303 civil servants retired by Yahya had sycophantically boasted to President Ayub Khan that he would finish me within three months. But both we and Ayub Khan could not end Bhutto and his campaign. Simi­larly, when the popular struggle dethroned Ayub Khan, some people said that the popularity of the People's Party and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had ended. Let it be known to my friends and foes that Bhutto cannot be finished, for the people of Pakistan are with him.

My dear friends, we want elections. And elections will be held. But do remember that elections alone cannot solve our problems. It is no big job merely to elect members to the Assembly. We have already had two Cons­tituent Assemblies. Now another one is to be elected. We too want a constitution for it is the fundamental requirement of a country. However, a constitution cannot give a home to the homeless, nor can it clothe the naked or feed the hungry. Nor can it become a school for your children, nor can it be a hospital for treatment. A constitution is not an end in itself but it is a must. We will try our best to frame a constitution within the specified period of 120 days. And there is no doubt that others too want a constitution. As far as religion is concerned, we are all Muslims. Pakistan is based on Islam and is a homeland for Muslims. We want democracy just as others do. There is no difference of opinion on this. If at all there is a difference, it is on the economic system. On the one hand, there are people who want to maintain and preserve the capitalistic system in the country, while on the other, there are those who are struggling for the establishment of a people's govern­ment, the introduction of social justice and a just economic system. The supporters of the capitalist system contend that they are in favour of the Islamic system and accuse those wanting to change the present system of doing un-Islamic acts. However, it is incorrect to say that to end the present capitalist system is against the ideology of Pakistan; I want to tell such people that the elimination of poverty and misery is not contrary to Islam or to Pakistan's ideology. Had it been so, this country would not have come into being at all. We would never have pledged in our manifesto to eliminate poverty, if this were an un-Islamic act.

Dear friends and brothers, our party has three guiding principles. Islam is our religion, democracy is our polity and socialism is our economy. These principles are in no way against Islam and the ideology of Pakistan. We are all Muslims. That is why I say, Islam is our religion. Islam has taught us democratic principles. Hence democracy is our polity. Islam envisages Musawat and teaches equality among human beings. Therefore, Islamic Musawat or Islamic Socialism is our economic programme. We are not against Islam. We believe Islam is a complete code of life. However, our opponents, argue that although Islam provides for democracy, it does not envisage Musawat. They support parliamentary democracy. I would like to ask them: where is parliamentary democracy in Islam? Which Quranic verse makes mention of parliamentary democracy? Which Hadith of the Holy Prophet has supported parliamentary democracy?

Parliamentary democracy is a British institution. Muslims did not invent it. If our opponents consider Quran as a complete code of life, then why are they demanding parliamentary democracy? Similarly, if the Holy Quran is a beacon of light for the Muslims, and if it includes all laws, then why are these people harping on the 1956 Constitution? Where is the 1956 Constitution provided for in Islam?

I call upon my opponents to stop being hypocrites, not to mislead the people and to learn the virtue of being consistent. If they speak of parliamentary democracy and the 1956 Constitution with reference to Quran, then why do they object to my calling for a change in the economic system in line with Islamic Musawat? I am a Muslim and I denounce other Muslims who use our religion as a cloak to hide their anti-people activities.

My dear friends, we are proud of being Muslims. God Almighty knows we are His followers. Who are these people to issue fatwas against us, these stooges of imperialists? People like them in the past, had had issued fatwas against Amanullah Khan. Mustafa Kamal, Sir Syed, Quaid-i-Azam and Iqbal. Today, they are issuing similar fatwas against the people of Pakistan. They are fake ulemas. I have great regard for genuine ulemas. I respect them. However the people will set right all the paid fatwa-givers, for by issuing edicts against the Muslims they have only done service to the 'kafirs'.

Well, if at all these so-called ulemas were looking for 'kafirs' they should have searched for them from among the enemies. Pakistan is a home­land for Muslims. I say, where had these fatwa-givers gone when the Pakis­tan Movement was in progress?

You should know that during the Pakistan Movement, these people were with Gandhi, Nehru and Patel instead of the Quaid-i-Azam. They should be ashamed of it. They should feel ashamed of having been with our enemies. Now these people cannot openly dare to oppose Pakistan. They have been conspiring to weaken Pakistan on one pretext or the other. How­ever, I assure you that their conspiracies here will be foiled as they were at the time of the creation of Pakistan.

Friends and fellow-workers, it is an irony that those who had opposed the Pakistan Movement, are now talking of the Pakistan ideology and of "danger to Islam." I ask, is the Pakistan ideology or Islam so weak that they should be in danger? I believe Islam has never been in danger, nor will it ever be. Islam is not in danger. Pakistan's ideology is not in danger. If at all there is anything in danger it is the capitalists, feudalists and their agents who have been having sleepless nights. Well, they will continue to have sleepless nights. We will, Insha Allah, change the present economic system.

When we speak of Islamic socialism, these people get anxious, although they actively support capitalism and feudalism. I don't know why they are averse to the people's "ism''.

My dear brothers, I have seen virtually the whole world. People all over the world have made tremendous progress, but the conditions of our people are going from bad to worse. Their miseries are always on the increase. A particular class has been sucking their blood. People are dying of hunger. How can we tolerate these circumstances? Some people talk of Pakistan's ideology. I will tell them what Pakistan's ideology means. The basic object in the establishment of Pakistan was that the people should progress and prosper. Their children should be given free education and the poor patients should be treated free. Everyone should get food, clothing and shelter accord­ing to his needs. So this is what the Pakistan ideology means and this also is the message of Islam. And I only want to put into practice the message of Islam.

Pakistan's ideology means that Muslims should govern Pakistan to make it a prosperous country. There should be no corruption and injustice. It is not Pakistan's ideology that a few people should have a monopoly over government and wealth at the expense of the people at large who are left to suffer the worst economic difficulties and denied any say in the running of the State. You can't call that the ideology of Pakistan. Ideology means service to the Muslims of Pakistan; well, not only that but also the protection of the Muslims in India, which is possible only when Pakistan is made strong and stable.

My dear friends and colleagues, unless the lot of the people, the labour­ers. peasants and the students is improved, no constitution, no matter what type, could ensure the security of Pakistan or the protection of its ideology. We want to change the present economic system on the basis of Islamic Socialism. This is, in fact, the message of the Quaid-i-Azam, who had established Pakistan. The Quaid wanted to introduce Islamic Socialism in Pakistan. It is not a mere slogan of mine. Those who are opposing Islamic Socialism today had also opposed the Quaid and dubbed him as a 'kafir'.

My dear brothers, while addressing a public meeting in Chittagong on 26 March 1948. The founder of Pakistan had said:

"When you say that Pakistan should be established on such basis of social justice and Islamic Socialism which stem from human equality and brotherhood, you are only representing the true feelings of millions of Musalmans. Similarly when you demand equal opportunities for all, you are expressing my views."

My friends and brothers, these are the words of Quaid-i-Azam. Had the Quaid not been the champion of Islamic Socialism, he would not have raised this slogan. We only want to follow the Quaid-i-Azam in order to strengthen Pakistan. The Quaid-i-Millat, Liaquat Ali Khan, was also a supporter of Islamic Socialism. At the Punjab University Ground, Lahore, on 25 August, 1949, while addressing a large gathering, he had said:

“But I would like to tell the big landowners that their days are over now. Pakistan was not made for a few people. We had not sacrificed the blood of millions of people only to protect the capitalistic system or a few capitalists."

We hear a number of "isms" being mentioned these days. But we believe in only one "ism", and that is Islamic Socialism, which in brief means everyone has an equal right to be provided with food, housing, clothing, education and medical facilities. Countries failing to provide these facilities can never make progress. The economic system which was evolved for us 1.350 years ago, still holds good. As a matter of fact whatever system you adopt, you will ultimately have to revert to Islamic Socialism, no matter what name is given to it.

My dear brothers, I am not telling you stories. I have in fad presented before you extracts from the speeches of the Quaid-i-Azam and the Quaid-i-Millat. Like then, Hussein Shaheed Suhrawardy also wanted to introduce Islamic Socialism in Pakistan. Is all that against our religion? Can you put up with the present state of affairs? We will change the whole comple­xion of our country with Islamic Socialism. Everybody will be provided with food, clothing and shelter according to his need. We can make this country great by practicing Islamic socialism. And we shall do that. I will remain with you at all stages, on all fronts, all the time. I will strengthen this country even if I have to sacrifice my life. We will make a Pakistan as visualised by the Poet of the East, Allama Iqbal, and for which the Quaid-i-Azam had struggled. We believe in a strong, great Pakistan, rather than a weak one. And as you have seen in the 23 years of Pakistan's existence, corruption, oppression, economic exploitation have been reigning supreme here. Today the prices of essential commodities of life have soared sky-high.

My dear friends, how regrettable it is that the students and labourers without whose help we could not have succeeded should now be locked up in jails. Had I been a ruler of this country, I would have kissed their hand instead of detaining them. I would have served them and elevated them. I demand that the Government should release the students and labourers. I am not pleading for the release of Students of any particular faction. I demand the release of all students. To me all students are equal. They are a source of strength to me. They are my brothers.

My friends and colleagues, I assure you that our nationalisation pro­gramme will begin as soon as a people's government is established. Some people are trying to set up a joint front against us with the co-operation of other political parties. These people claim to have created Pakistan and of working closely with the Quaid-i-Azam. They call themselves the soul of Pakistan. Who then are they making a united front with? The people who had opposed Pakistan and who were expelled by the Quaid-i-Azam from the Muslim League? Such a front is against the people. They are not friends of the people. In fact they have been frightened by the people's revolution. They shall not succeed in their mischief. We don't believe in any front. My party will not join any political party in setting up a front before the elections. The people are my front! You are my front for you have been, you are and you will remain with me. And I am proud of having you with me. We don't believe in manoeuvring, or in politics of collusions. We believe in politics in the open. If there arises a need for a front, it will be set up for constitution making, after the elections. We are with the people. If we lose, the people will lose. Remember, if the People's party is ever harmed, the people will also get harmed. And if our party succeeds, this will be the success of the people.

My dear brothers, there was a front, but that too is crumbling now, for those who formed it say they did not know before that G.M.Syed will also co-operate with the supporters of Six Points. The known fact is that G.M.Syed has been supporting Six Points since July of last year. When Sheikh Mujib came to Karachi, G.M. Syed gave a party in his honour and there he announced his support for Six Points. I have political differences with G.M. Syed, but no personal differences. When he invited me 10 join his United Front, I refused saying that my politics was based on a national outlook. I told him I wanted to serve the whole nation. True, I was born in Sind, but I am a Pakistani, and all Muhajirs, Bengalis, Punjabis, Pathans and Baluchs are brothers to me. Mine is a popular politics. Those who entered into an agreement with G.M. Syed knew that he was a supporter of Six Points. Despite that they joined hands with him. This front was a great conspiracy against the progress and prosperity of the people of Pakistan. It was an attempt to perpetuate the capitalistic system.

I now come to foreign policy.

You know how harmful and incorrect a foreign policy Pakistan had before I became Foreign Minister. We had been completely isolated from the rest of the world. Pakistan's foreign policy had chained the people. We had no free will to go anywhere. We had to obey what the U.S. ordered us to do. Our relations with Russia, China, Afghanistan, and many Asian, Latin American and East European countries were bad. Our policies were those of SEATO and CENTO. The U.S. Ambassador could keep Pakistan's policy in line with Washington's. If he wished Pakistan's foreign policy to toe a particular line during the Suez war, Pakistan obliged him. However, Pakistan's foreign policy became independent when I became Foreign Minister. Yes, I say I made some contribution in liberating it. Our relations with Russia, China, Afghanistan, East European countries and the Third -World improved. RCD brought Pakistan, Iran and Turkey close together. So, if I can serve you abroad, as a Foreign Minister, I can serve you better within the country. If, with your co-operation. I can defeat the imperialists outside the country, then all of us can jointly defeat the imperialist agents inside the country.

My dear brothers, I am 42 now. And I am proud of three things. First, that I gave an independent foreign policy to the country and supported the people of Kashmir in the Security Council when India attacked Pakistan Secondly, with your co-operation I defeated dictatorship in this country. Thirdly, I delivered the message of Islami Musawat in cities, towns, and villages, and from door to door.

My dear friends and brothers, before the war broke out between India and China in 1962, India had boastfully claimed that she had a neutral policy and friendship with all. Indians and Chinese were then described as brothers to each other. India then had friendship with Russia, America, China, Asia, and Africa and with almost all countries of Latin America. But when war broke out between India and China, changes took place in the foreign policy of all countries of the world. Pakistan's foreign policy also changed. The Sino-Indian war rocked the Himalayas. It was time for Pakistan to gain some advantages. But on a critical occasion like that, our head of state went to Hunza. When the Chinese forces entered Assam, he was riding a mule and shooting with a camera. Later, a British Minister. Duncan Sandys, and an American special envoy, Averall Harriman, flew into Rawalpindi. They proposed that Pakistan hold talks with India on the Kashmir issue. Ayub Khan should have realised then that India would not settle the Kashmir problem. When India reeled back from China, she became amenable to talks with Pakistan on the Kashmir question, although you have seen that it has not as yet been solved. We must keep this experi­ence in mind. India is practising the same tactics in relation to the Farakka Barrage. She does not want to settle this problem either. She only wants to play for time. She wants to see conditions in Pakistan deteriorate further in which case, she thinks, this problem will be difficult for us to press.

My dear friends and colleagues, our stand on Kashmir has been that the issue be resolved on the basis of self-determination. Then we shifted to demanding "a meaningful decision." Afterwards it became "a just and honourable solution." I say that no solution of the Kashmir issue would be acceptable to us other than on the basis of the right of self-determination.

India says that Kashmir is her integral part. The Indian Foreign Minister, Sardar Swaran Singh, told an American delegate in the Security Council that Indo-Pakistan relations could not improve so long as Bhutto remained Pakistan's Foreign Minister, nor would there be a settlement of the Kashmir problem. I said if I was an obstacle in a settlement of the Kashmir issue, I was willing to commit suicide but let the issue be solved. I separated from the Government, but the Kashmir problem remains where it was. In fact, India is being run by usurpers and exploiters. The Kashmir problem can­not be solved unless we confront India. Some people say I want war. I do not want war. But I do not want a defeat either. We will confront India at every step in order to make her see reason.

My dear friends and brothers, the systematic Indian aggression against Pakistan began when on April 8, 1965, she bombed Koting and moved her famous Brigade into action in NEFA against China. Later, shastri declared Kanjarkot as Indian territory and demanded that Pakistan vacate that area. Actually not only Kanjarkot but also the whole of the Rann of Kutch area belonged to Pakistan. Earlier, India had occupied the chhad Bet area She had two objectives in doing so. First, she wanted to find out how Pakistan would read. Secondly, she wanted to test the strength and depth of relations between Pakistan and China. With the blessings of God Almighty our forces resolutely confronted the enemy and inflicted a heavy defeat on her. Fierce fighting was going on in the Rann of Kutch area And at a time when our single division was poised to annihilate India's two divisions and two brigades, Ayub Khan stopped our forces from continu­ing the war, although they were advancing.

On 27 December. 1963, the Hair of the Holy Prophet was stolen from the Hazrat Bal Shrine in Occupied Kashmir. The people of Kashmir rose against the Indian Government. They were persecuted. Many of them were killed. Then in 1964. India made an unsuccessful attempt to occupy the Chakrot area of Azad Kashmir. In 1965, she occupied the Kargil area of Azad Kashmir but she had to vacate it on the intervention of the Security Council. In May, 1965, a new wave of oppression against the Kashmiris began in Occupied Kashmir. Seventeen people were killed. 1.926 injured and 419 were arrested. Sixteen newspapers were banned. But disturbances went on increasing against the Indian rulers. On 8 August. 1965, the Kashmiris rose in open rebellion against Indian oppression. India alleged that 7,000 'Mujahideen' had entered Occupied Kashmir from Pakistan. But I ask how could Pakistan's Mujahideen enter Occupied Kashmir in the presence of six divisions of the Indian Army along the cease-fire line? In fact, the Kash­miris themselves had started that movement because they had been persecuted. Scared of the Kashmiri people's struggle, the Indian forces completely burnt two of their villages in the Rajoun area. The U.N. representative in Srinagar. General Nimmo, contradicted the Indian allegation that Pakistanis had entered Occupied Kashmir. In spite of that India bombed a Pakistani village. Awan Sharif, on 23 August, as a result of which 25 Pakistani civilians were killed. On 24 August, India occupied Tithwal, and on 25th the Haji Pir Pass. Pakistan retaliated against these attacks on 7 September and occupied Chamb.

However, when Indian forces were busy committing aggression against Pakistan, Ayub Khan was playing golf in Swat. I reached Risalpur from Rawalpindi by plane, from where I went to Mardan by taxi. And from Mardan I hired another taxi to reach Swat. From the Wali of Swat I learnt that Ayub Khan was playing golf.

I told him. "Mr. President, India has continually been committing aggression against us. Please order our armed forces to retaliate." Ayub Khan replied rather casually, "Yes, Commander-in-Chief Musa Khan came tome yesterday. I have given him instructions. You better talk to him." I said, "Mr. President, what purpose would my talking to him serve? Whatever decision is to be taken, you had better take yourself." At this Ayub Khan said, "All right; you go, I will be coming later."

Then I went to the residence of the Wali of Swat. I had to wait for the President for one hour, during which he changed his dress. I told him if we failed to react to Indian attacks, she would occupy Azad Kashmir and also attack Pakistan. Hearing this Ayub Khan got worried and said, "All right, we will talk it over at dinner." I told him again that if we did not retaliate, our country would be destroyed. The Wall" of Swat supported my view. Address­ing himself to Ayub Khan, he said, "Your Foreign Minister is right in saying that we must retaliate against Indian aggression." Ayub Khan said. "Well, you go now and tell Musa to take suitable action for retaliation."

I came back to Rawalpindi and told Musa about the President's order to retaliate against Indian aggression. On this Musa Khan said he would himself talk to the President. Finally, when our brave forces were ordered to retaliate, they strongly confronted the enemy. They continually kept advancing and eventually were only four miles from Akhnour. Had the Pakistani troops occupied Akhnour and cut off Jammu from there, six divisions of the Indian Army would have been completely cut off.

Our present provisional President, Yahya Khan, who was witnessing a tatoo show at that time, had told me: "We should occupy Akhnour." I said, "Well, do so." Yahya Khan was incharge of that front and he wanted to occupy Akhnour. But then Ayub Khan ordered that the army should retreat to protect borders along Lahore and Sialkot.

General Yahya Khan had assured Ayub Khan that Pakistani troops would occupy Akhnour before the Indian army could reach the borders of Lahore and Sialkot. Pakistan's High Commissioner in India, Mr. Arshad Husain, had endorsed this view. But Ayub Khan did not agree to this plan.

My friends and brothers, our brave forces were ready to advance on 23 September. China had given an ultimatum to India. She helped us for which we are grateful to her. Iran supported us. Hats off to the Shahinshah who is our guest these days. To Turkey we are grateful. President Soekarno had told me, "All my forces are yours. Take all that we have and protect Pakistan." We suffered a heavy loss on the Khem Karan front. Our brave forces twice reached near Amritsar's suburbs. But on both occasions they were called back. General Yahya Khan, Air Marshal Nur Khan, and the present PAF Chief, Air Marshal Rahim, all of them wanted to teach India a lesson. But Musa Khan and Ayub Khan were frightened. And right at that time I was saying at the Security Council that we would fight for a thousand years.

My friends and brothers, before the war was over, President Ayub Khan had promised to the British and American representatives that he would not send me to represent Pakistan at the Security Council. But the Law Minister, S.M. Zafar, phoned the President from New York that Bhutto was badly needed at the Security Council. I told the President. "I am the Foreign Minister, I am accountable to the people. So I should go and re­present Pakistan there. Even China has withdrawn her ultimatum; so why do you stop me now from going there?" After a day-long discussion, I was allowed to go to New York at 7 p.m. And immediately after that, my departure was announced on the radio although it is never done during a war. India wanted to destroy the plane in which I was travelling. But with the blessings of God Almighty, she could not do that. Next morning, at 9 O'clock I reached New York. I called a meeting of the Pakistani delegation, and asked them whether or not I should make a speech. The Pakistan Ambassador in the United States reacted in the negative. Our Permanent Representative at the U.N. also opposed my making a speech. I told them that I had to convey the voice of the Pakistani people to the nations of the world. I said I wanted to tell them what injustice and treachery had been done to Pakistan.

My dear brothers, you know how I in the Security Council spoke about your struggles, sufferings and sacrifices. You triumphed. Your brave forces beat back the enemy. The people made sacrifices. They will always triumph!

After the war, Ayub Khan went to Washington and met President Johnson who frightened him, threatened him and forced him to his knees. I was pained to see the President of a brave nation being so easily browbeaten.

My dear brothers, we had stood up to the enemy. But Ayub Khan gave in. 1 was extremely pained. Ayub Khan was a selfish man, he was corrupt, he betrayed the nation at Tashkent. What do you ask me about Tashkent? Ask Ayub Khan. I was the one who opposed the Tashkent Declaration. He signed it.

 

  Speeches
Slideshow

Slideshow

Sign Our Guest Book