Talk:Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War/GA1

Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War
Rape during the Bangladesh Liberation War
Location	East Pakistan now Bangladesh
Date	March 1971 - December 1971
Target	women, chidren and men in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan)
Deaths	1-3 million according to most estimates
Injured	200,000-400,000 raped, unknown number injured
Perpetrators	Pakistan army soldiers; Al-Shams militia; Al-Badr militia; local collaborators; (1,597 identified and charged)

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: JCAla (talk · contribs) 16:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Going to review this article soon. JCAla (talk) 16:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Can you find some illustrations? I. e. of a place in Bangladesh that was affected or someone responsible from the Pak military or a flag of a militia? Done

There are images of people accused, until such a time as they are convicted I do not think such images should be used though, it smacks of guilt by association. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Background

"4% Urdu speakers" you sourced with "Shah, Mehtab Ali (1997). The foreign policy of Pakistan: ethnic impacts on diplomacy, 1971–1994. I.B.Tauris. p. 51", in that source are they referring to Sindh or the whole of Pakistan with regards to the 4%?

The whole of Pakistan Darkness Shines (talk) 12:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why especially Bengali (opposed to Sindhi i. e.) was as important 1) that it was nominated for second national language and 2) for the Bangladesh conflict? I.e. "Bengali was spoken by such and such number of people and the dominant language in Eastern Pakistan" Done
Were tensions reduced between 1952-1970? Done
Can you elaborate for the reader the Awami League's connection to the language dispute. It is hard to understand the connection if you do not have the background knowledge. Done
Were there also other factors (besides language) for dispute between East and West? Done

Already mentioned, economic and political under representation Darkness Shines (talk) 11:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting: "The genocide in Bangladesh caught the outside observers as well as the Bengali nationalists by surprise. After all, the Bengali nationalists were essentially waging a constitutional peaceful movements for democracy and autonomy. Their only crime, as U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy observed, appeared to have been to win an election. Perhaps, the main reason behind the atrocities was to terrorize the population into submission. The military commander in charge of the Dhaka operations reportedly claimed that he would kill four million people in 48 hours and thus have a "final" solution of the Bengali problem. .... But the reason behind the genocide were not simply to terrorize the people and punish them for resistance; there were also elements of racism in this act of genocide. The Pakistan army, consisting of mainly Punjabis and Pathans, had always looked on the Bengalis as racially inferior (a non-martial, physically weak race, not interested or able to serve in the army)." (p. 147, Samuel Totten) Done

I had missed this, Shall add a little to the Army Action section Darkness Shines (talk) 11:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who was Yahya Khan, a reader might ask. Something like "Then acting President of Pakistan Yahya Khan (from the Western establishment)" would do. Done

More interesting stuff:

"In December 1970 Pakistan held general elections, the first since its independence. The Awami League, headed by East Pakistan's popular leader Mujibur Rahman, won a clear majority of seats in the national assembly, but West Pakistan's chief martial law administrator and president Khan, refused to honour the democratic choice of his country's majority. At the end of March 1971, after Mujib demanded virtual independence for East Pakistan, Yahya Khan ordered a military massacre in Dhaka." (The History of India by Kenneth Pletcher p. 311)

This is already covered really. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan-army actions

Who is Samuel Totten? => "a genocide scholar and expert on war crimes" Makes it more pleasant to read if people do not have to follow EL to understand. Done
"often in front of their families, to "punish" and terrorize." is this in source? As you put source #13 before it. It is reference 14, and yes it says that. Done
According to Samuel Totten, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) also played an important role to make the army take actions. (p. 149)

Which Totten reference is this? I have more than one source from Totten I believe.

It's "Teaching about genocide: issues, approaches, and resources" p. 149

I really do not see how to fit this in, we do not want to overload the background section. Perhaps in could go under the Pakistani government reaction section somewhere? Darkness Shines (talk) 22:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anything specific about the role of Al-Shams and Al-Badr in the atrocities? No other information that I can find, just that they took part Done

Aftermath

Who is Delwar Hossain Sayeedi? -> the Deputy Leader of Jammat-e-Islami Bangladesh Done

Media depictions

Not sure whether assamtribune.com is a reliable source. But you didn't source a controversial subject with it, just that fact that a movie is being screened. So, if you find another source, good, but it's not that great a deal.

Infobox

Found an infobox which you could use:

When I tried to add this all I see on the article is a straight line? Not an info box, no idea were I have gone wrong. Darkness Shines (talk) 22:23, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if the infobox in this article should give the death numbers as it is about the rapes which would go under injuries. Number being 200,000-400,000. Also, the number 3 million how many sources give that fix number? Did you find any sources that gives a number of 200,000 killed? (That's what was claimed in the Pakistan article discussion, but until now I only saw sources with 3 million except for Pakistani commission number of 26,000).

Who gives an estimate of 200,000 killed? Majority of sources I have read say 3million. Will fix infobox now. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:42, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Done[reply]

Huon at the Pakistani article Bangladesh discussion mentioned that figure because of a Bangladesh Liberation War source which I checked and 1) didn't work and 2) was unreliable as it was something like user.erols.bangladesh ... That is why I ask you if you are aware of any reliable international sources mentioning a number of 200,000 or even 1,000,000 instead of 3,000,000?

No none, I will look in on the chat over at Pakistan article. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:26, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, since we now found that gendercide source, the number should be put at "1-3 million according to most estimates", don't you think?

What about the infobox in this way (the picture shows random people in Bangladesh, don't know whether it fits, but afterall it were people like these who were targeted, but you decide since this picture could be a problem, so perhaps not):

Indian intervention

This is a possible source for the role of the Indian intervention:

"On November 21, 1971, India intervened militarily on the basis of the international law doctrine of humanitarian intervention. Three weeks later the Pakistani army's eastern command surrendered to the Indian armed forces ..." (Crimes against humanity in international criminal law By M. Cherif Bassiouni p. 549)

Done

25 March

A minor issue with this sentence: "On 26 March 1971 the Pakistan Army launched Operation Searchlight against the supporters of a nascent Bengali nationalism". See this source:

"Pakistani Lieutenant-General A.A.K. Niazi referred to the Ganges river plain - home to the majority of Bengalis and the largest city, Dhaka, as a "low-lying land of low, lying people." According to R.J. Rummel, "Bengalis were often compared with monkeys and chickens. ... The [minority] Hindus among the Bengalis were as Jews to the Nazis: scum and vermin that [had] to be exterminated." [...] The spark for the conflagaration came in December 1970, with national elections held to pave the way for a transition from military rule. The [East Pakistan] Awami League won a crushing victory [...] This gave the League a majority in the Pakistani parliament as a whole, and the right to form the next government. West Pakistani rulers, led by General Yahya Khan, saw this as a direct threat to their power and interests. After negotiations failed to resolve the impasse, Khan met with four senior generals on February 22, 1971, and issued orders to annihilate the Awami League and its popular base. From the outset, they planned a campaign of genocide. "Kill three millon [Bengalis]," said Khan, " and the rest will eat out of our hands." On March 25, the genocide was launched. [...]."

(Genocide: A Comprehensive Introduction by Adam Jones)

Done

Already using Adam I believe, this however is quite good for the military section and shall add it now. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:42, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Date was 25 March. Maybe: "On 25 March 1971 the Pakistan Army launched Operation Searchlight to maintain the rule of the West Pakistan-dominated military over East Pakistan and to curb a nascent Bengali nationalism." (?) What do you say? Done

War Crimes Fact Finding Committee

"In 2009, after a 19-year investigation, the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee released documentation naming 1,597 people they said to be responsible for the atrocities."

A proposal for a slight change, as there might me more than those people, but it were those people which were supposedly identified:

In 2009, after a 19-year investigation, the War Crimes Fact Finding Committee released documentation which was able to identify 1,597 of the people responsible for the atrocities. Not done WP:OR the source does not say that

Yes, but it is obvious that 1,597 people cannot be responsible for 3 million dead and up to 400,000 rapes. But currently the article creates that impression. Further these people in the list were collaborators. Check this source which states:

"A cabal of five Pakistani generals orchestrated the events: President Yahya Khan, General Tikka Khan, chief of staff General Pirzada, security chief General Umar Khan, and intelligence chief General Akbar Khan. ... The genocide and gendercidal atrocities were also perpetrated by lower-ranking officers and ordinary soldiers. These "willing executioners" were fuelled by an abiding anti-Bengali racism, especially against the Hindu minority. ... And the soldiers were free to kill at will. The journalist Dan Coggin quoted one Punjabi captain as telling him, 'We can kill anyone for anything. We are accountable to no one.'

It remains unclear for some of these five people whether they ordered a genocide or just a military operation, but at least Yahya Khan has been quoted as saying 'Kill such and such Bengalis and the rest will eat out of our hands.' The others should be handled with care as it remains unknown what their exact role was, whether they were only involved in planning military actions against combatants or involved in systematic planning of acts of genocide as such.

Also, as this was a Bangladesh commission, were these people only Bengali collaborators (part of Al-Shams or Jaamat) or did the list include West Pakistani military people? Done

List does not say, currently only collaborators are being prosecuted, already in the article.

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail: