�The Tashkent conference was viewed as a great success and the declaration that was released was hoped to be a framework for a lasting peace. The declaration stated that Indian and Pakistani forces would pull back to their pre-conflict positions, pre-August lines, no later than February 25, 1966, the nations would not interfere in each other's internal affairs, economic and diplomatic relations would be restored, there would be an orderly transfer of prisoners of war, and the two leaders would work towards improving bilateral relations".
The adverse impact of the Tashkent Declaration cause wide spread anger and popular upsurge against the regime of President Ayub Khan. As I wrote in February, 1966:
"Hardly had the ink dried of the Declaration when the regime found itself confronted with an explosion, mainly in West Pakistan, against the letters of the pact if not against its spirit.
The students in the Western Wing built up what in spite of 'news-control' appeared to have been a strong enough movement to warrant the snapping close of the colleges, schools and other educational institutions. The sense of discontent and dissatisfaction with the TD, spread far and spread strong from its centre-war-ravaged and, therefore, sensitive Lahore. It assumed within a short time proportions serious enough to make President Ayub feel and act on the necessity of explaining and clarifying the TD to pacify the agitated.
His sudden and apparently not pre-planned address to the nation broadcast over the radio hard on the heels of the signing of the TD proved that he too had a point to make. Of course, it is uncertain as to how far it succeeded in achieving its intended purpose. It did indeed accord the professional hailers an opportunity to 'double-hail'. But there can be little doubt that the appreciation of these people was hardly the thing the President or his comrades in power were after.
If the Tashkent Declaration has proved to be a trial for them, so were the talks at Tashkent, in fact more so. Every day, perhaps, every hour it seemed as if the dialogue would snap. Moscow's mediation notwithstanding. That was only too natural. The cause of the Indo-Pakistani war in September last year (1965) was the problem of Jammu and Kashmir. The basic cause logically was also the crux of the problem of reaching an accord at Tashkent between Pakistan and India under Russian aegis.
On this basic issue the stands of the disputants were poles asunder. The Indian team at Tashkent, seemingly hardened rather than softened, refused to admit that the problem of Jammu and Kashmir was a problem at all. Pakistan, on the contrary has always focused attention on the Kashmir problem. Without a guarantee by India of ensuring for the people of India-held occupied Kashmir the opportunity for self determination there could be no lasting peace, the Pakistan team emphasised. In fact it seemed at first and almost to the very last of the Tashkent dialogue that even a temporary peace with formal trappings would not be acceptable to Pakistan if commitments are not obtained from India on the issue of Kashmir.
When, however, the TD was signed and relatively more permanent peace between the erstwhile combatants ushered in without any visible commitment by India on Kashmir problem, the high hopes of Pakistanis were dashed to the ground.
They saw that the TD said that the problem of Jammu and Kashmir was discussed and the parties had set forth their respective views on the problem; simply that and nothing more. Softly touching the basic problem thus, the Declaration went on to enlist the many programmes to normalise relations between the belligerents of the September war.
It seemed, on the face of it, as if the terms of agreement were drawn up, details and all, by the Indians while the Pakistani team did nothing more than add the rather evasive and inconclusive paragraph on the 'discussion' of the Kashmir problem and sign on the dotted line.
The feeling was intensive to the point of explosion in West Pakistan which bore the brunt of the fury of the war.
There the people reacted vehemently. They felt angry with the regime and the anger was the outcome of surcharged emotion."
Meanwhile, during 1965 there were vital and interesting happenings in my life. There was a change of the work place. No, I did not leave or lose my job as a teacher of the Dhaka University. Social Science faculties such as Economics, Political Science and Sociology housed temporarily in 1963 and 1964 in the then Science Annex, later the Statistical building opposite the Shaheed Minar, were transferred during 1965 in the newly built massive, almost majestic--Arts Building in Neelkhet.
Dr Mizanur Rahman Shelley, founder Chairman of Centre for Development Research (CDRB), and former technocrat Cabinet Minister of Bangladesh, died on August 12, 2019. He contributed his writeups to the Daily Observer which are being published regularly as "The Symphony of Our Times".
