Bangladesh: From a Nation to a State.

The author of this book, Craig Baxter, a retired diplomat and a teacher-scholar, is well known for his writings on Bangladesh, and this is his latest work aimed at understanding the poor but vibrant south Asian nation which celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary of independence in 1996. For the audience of this book, there is something for everybody: for the beginners in Bangladesh studies, it's a readable compendium from the ancient to modern times, and for the political scientists, it's a quick grasp of the kaleidoscopic politics in former East Pakistan and independent Bangladesh. For the area specialists, the book has an impressive collection of election data from the 1930s to the 1990s in undivided Bengal, former East Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Many would agree with the author that Bangladeshis had over centuries developed a national feeling which manifested itself through the 1971 independence struggle but many also fret about the unending acrimony over Bangladesh nationalism since independence. The right wing Islamic groups and leaders who disputed the Bangla-centric secular nationalism have been insisting that separation from Pakistan did not mark the end of a predominantly Muslim consciousness in Bangladesh. In that country, the clash of history has replaced ideology as the new faultline of political conflict and the embers from the past have divided the political actors as well as the intellectuals with no end in sight. For the last few years, groups among those who believed in the Islamic history of Bangladesh have been celebrating the conquest of Mohammad Bakhtiar Khilji in 1202 A.D. as marking the beginning of Muslim ascendancy in Bengal. Such views of Muslim nationalism are despised by the Bengali nationalists who believed that the Hindu-Muslim differences in Bengal were no more than banal which did not call for the religious partition of Bengal (and India) in 1947. Baxter has not seriously examined the dichotomy between secular Bengali nationalism and the ubiquity of Islamic legacy, his narratives, though chronologically accurate, miss the core issue of Bangladesh evolving from a nation to a state.

Chapter 6 of this book examines the events since 1937 which led to the division of Bengal in 1947. Frequently, the secular nationalists in Bangladesh and the liberal scholars around the world blamed the Muslim League's two-nation paradigm for the partition of India when the British left. based on a wealth of new information and fresh analysis, Joya Chatterjee, in her book Bengal Divided: Hindu Communalism and Partition, 1932-47 (Cambridge University Press, 1994) has shown that the Hindu reluctance to accept the Muslim legislative majority, accomplished through adult franchise, was the decisive factor for the division of Bengal. Baxter's brief account (chapter 6) of the period does not throw any new light on the Hindu resistance to the possible political domination of the Muslims in united Bengal where they had a numerical majority. In reality, the Hindu-Muslim separatism was confirmed by the failure of a united (and possibly sovereign) Bengal broached by the then Bengal Muslim League secretary Abdul Hashem and Congress leader Sarat Bose.

Chapter 7 of the book encompasses the period (1947-71) of Bangladesh as former East Bengal/East Pakistan when language, economic disparity and provincial autonomy were the dominating issues. His discussion on the catastrophic developments of 1971, however, falls short in description as well as in analysis of the "last days of united Pakistan" and the final call for independence. Was the demand for secession driven by the trauma of the military crackdown? Did Sheikh Mujibar Rahman (Mujib) actually call for independence or did he euphemistically refer to it? Did the student leaders preempt Mujib in asking for secession? Why did Mujib surrender to the Pakistan military? The embattled terrain of Bangladesh historiography deserves the scrutiny of neutral historians and Baxter, well qualified as he is for such a task, should have fulfilled that intellectual challenge.

General Yahya Khan's refusal to transfer power to the Awami League and the brutal crackdown catapulted East Pakistan into a struggle for complete independence which drastically changed the political landscape in 1971, and neither the leaders nor the people had enough time to delineate Bangladesh nationalism. With Mujib in Pakistani jail, and partly under Indian prodding, the future ideological map for Bangladesh was drawn in Calcutta. Much of what the exiled government in India did was to extricate the Bangladeshis from the terrible military repression, and to tap deep into the Bengali resentment and rejection of Pakistan including the Muslim identity which "midwifed" the creation of a separate Muslim state in 1947. Any serious prognosis of Bangladesh nationalism will have to enquire into those issues.

Baxter points out that at the surrender ceremony of December 16, 1971, the Mukti Bahini (the Bangladesh freedom fighters) members were not formally present when the Pakistani military officially surrendered to the invading Indian generals. He also observes that while the Pakistani repression was condemned by the international community, most countries disapproved of the Indian attack and their abetment of the armed confrontation. None of those statements will be appreciated by the nationalists in Bangladesh, but those are the historical facts.

There are a few typographical errors which may be corrected in the future edition of the book: (a) BKSAL not BAKSAL (p. 92); (b) (Humaira) Momen not (Humaira) Memon (p. 58); (c) from Pakistan jail, Mujib returned in January 1972 not January 1971 (p. 84); and (d) "upazilla" is usually spelled with one 1.

MOHAMMAD RASHIDUZZAMAN Rowan University, New Jersey, U.S.A.