INTERVIEW TO ERICH DAMMEN OF SWISS TELEVISION, AT RAWALPINDI, August 9, 1972

Interviewer: The Bengalis now being separated from Pakistan and about 18 million Muslims living in India, what subsists of the ideology of the State of’ Pakistan which Mr. Jinnah created as a homeland of Indian Muslims?

President: Bengal, whether it is a part of Pakistan or not, its composition is Muslim and if it chooses to separate from Pakistan, it will not merge into India. It will expect to remain as a sovereign, independent State, comprising Muslim majority population. So from that point of view, all that it would entail is that we would not be constitutionally linked together; but, nonetheless, our interests, our approach, our welfare, our thinking will be guided by Islamic principles as Muslim States. But this question has not yet been finally determined. We hope that it will be determined one way or the other. We are trying, of course, that we should retain some links between our two parts and until I meet the leaders of Dacca, I cannot say what the final outcome would be.

Interviewer: Some U.P. refugees in Sindh are being told that they should go back to India, a country which had Dr. Zakir Hussain, a Muslim, as head of state. Don’t you think that Pakistan is in a sense, a third Muslim country on the subcontinent?

President: I would not say that. There are some individuals who express certain views in the tension of problems that arise. We have had no democracy for a long period of time and when democratic forces are unleashed and when there is freedom of speech which has been restricted for so long people get excited. They say all sorts of things but I think the general feeling is not reflected in these utterances.

Interviewer: Pakistan still being a very Islamic country, would you take Biharis here as refugees?

President: The question is that there are Muslims in India also. That does not mean that every Muslim in India would ipso facto become a citizen of Pakistan or that they would like to come. So this is a premature question. It has to be settled with the overall question that will arise between us and the leaders of Dacca. However, I doubt very much if all the Biharis of East Pakistan would want a mass migration to West Pakistan; nor is that desirable because they would like to get settled in their own homes. Moreover, they are citizens of East Pakistan as well. They have lived there; they have worked there; they have developed East Pakistan. And nobody has a right to throw them out like that.

Interviewer: The Simla Agreement, the normalization of relations between India and Pakistan and Pakistan leaving SEATO are all signs of a reorientation, are they not? In which particular direction do you see your country developing? Do you think the Near East would be the new direction?

President: We have always given attention to the Near East for a variety of reasons. And we will continue to give attention to the Near East, as indeed to the rest of the world. But, of course, the emphasis changes and shifts from time to time. New developments require new efforts and new concentrations. From that point of view, of course, there will be greater emphasis on our dealings with the Near East.

Interviewer: Most of your neighboring countries are conservative, even royalist. Don’t you think your socialist state will be surrounded by these other strange and different regimes?

President: Every country goes through its own historical processes. These processes are similar to those in the neighboring countries, but, essentially, they are the product of one’s own efforts, one’s own struggle and one’s own history. From that point of view, Pakistan’s complexion and composition in the future will be determined by the historical forces that have been at play in Pakistan. Of course, there are changes taking place in the Near East as well. I would not say that things are static there. There are dynamic changes taking place in those countries.

Interviewer: How far are your People’s Guards a parallel to the Cultural Revolution in China? People have even been impressed by the fact that you have the title of Chairman. What is your definition of your socialism?

President: Well, we have taken steps to show what we mean by socialism. We have taken over the major industries in the country. We have nationalized a good deal of the land. We have given lands to the peasants without paying any compensation to the land-owners. We have taken many other steps in the same direction, in the field of education, in the field of health and social services. But this is only a beginning and we hope that with the passage of time, step by step, we can further consolidate the control of the people over the means of production and distribution. This does not mean that we will not permit the private sector to remain. We believe there is a role for the private sector in our country and that it will, we hope, make contribution in the development of the economy. Basically, however, our emphasis will be more on the public sector, on an effort to bring the resources of the country in the hands of the people.

Interviewer: Some sections of the labor think that the social reforms are not going quickly enough. The 22 families are not happy about reforms. Don’t you think the base of your party is becoming smaller and smaller?

President: Yes, that does happen in the beginning. Dislocations take place in a period of transition and it is not possible in the beginning to satisfy all forces. I think in all countries where there have been social changes and where there have been revolutionary changes, these problems do arise. There is a period of expectancy and hope and the people, somehow or the other, don’t get completely satisfied with the changes in the beginning. But when they feel the impact of these changes and they see the benefits of those changes, they settle down.

Interviewer: Do you think the forces of regional autonomy in Sindh, Baluchistan and the tribal areas are a danger to Pakistan?

President: I don’t think so. We have had these cultural variations in the country and the challenge of leadership is to try and accommodate these cultural aspirations within the framework of nationhood. We believe the flowering of our society by various cultures will contribute to the development of a much richer culture which will be our national culture. There are many common denominators in spite of these different factors and we are counting on those common denominators to maintain the links between the people of the country.

Interviewer: Do you think Urdu is a common denominator?

President: I would say Urdu is a common denominator. It is the national language. People in all the provinces of Pakistan speak Urdu. That is one common denominator, but there are others. The most important of all, of course, is the common faith which binds the people. Racially also, there is more cohesion in Pakistan than in the neighboring state of India. And now with the social and economic changes, the people feel on a people’s level, on a one-to-one, man-to-man level, that things are being done for them throughout the country with justice. With this approach, there is yet another factor of unity.

Interviewer: When you released Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, was it not a kind of recognition of Bengal? Also, the opening of the National Assembly has sealed the separation de facto. Why don’t you recognize Bangladesh de jure?

President: My Government has looked upon this problem dispassionately but naturally for the sake of our national interest and also in the interest of Muslim Bengal; we have tried to analyze the pros and cons of recognition. Of course, it evokes emotional feelings but in spite of these emotional feelings, we have to think not only of today but what will come in the days ahead. From that point of view we were preparing ourselves, moving forward to meet Mr. Mujibur Rahman, have a dialogue with him, discuss the problem of our future relationship in its total context, and after that discussion we could have then taken the next logical step.

But Mr. Mujibur Rahman, unfortunately, has taken a negative attitude and this negative attitude has not contributed towards progress. I think that you will be the first person to be told that because Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, unfortunately, has taken a negative attitude, that what we were seeking has been made more difficult and as a result of this, since the procedures for reconciliation and for bringing a settlement have not been followed, I am afraid that some setback will be forthcoming as a result of his negative attitude. As such, unnecessarily, time will be lost; and we hope that even now he realizes the need, the imperative necessity, for discussion between the two of us so that we can resolve our outstanding problems. We cannot resolve them without meeting one another.

Interviewer: Last question. How can a humiliated army be made the finest fighting machine in Asia and also be made to stay as a dumb servant of the nation? Is it not a danger to re-arm an army that has been humiliated?

President: It is a question of necessity because our problems and our disputes have not yet been resolved. Once disputes and problems are resolved, problems which have led us into conflict three times during the last 25 years, then the people would not feel the need of maintaining a large army. But until that happens, we will have to, in our own defence, maintain an army which can defend our territorial integrity against a much bigger neighbor. So it is a question of necessity and, of course, it has been a fine army, a very good army. The events of last year might make you question this, but there were many factors that combined to produce the events of last year, and I cannot say that this will always happen. Why should it always happen when the nation defends itself? And it will defend itself to the last man.

We hope there will be no war in the future between India and Pakistan but we have to be prepared because we have been victims of aggression in the past. The Simla Agreement has taken place. It is a beginning. We hope it will produce lasting and durable peace. If you have the support and blessings of the people, then everyone has to fall in place. If the people are satisfied, if the Government is discharging its duties and fulfilling its responsibilities, then not only the army but all other institutions and all other forces have to remain in line and under a democratic discipline.

Interviewer: Thank you very much, Your Excellency.