Bangladesh Poor Peasantry in Revolt during 1947-’71

Farooque Chowdhury

Bangladesh poor peasantry had an active role in political struggles and played a crucial role in the country’s glorious War for Liberation. The poor peasantry’s politics and struggles during the period 1947-1971 were an important part of the perspective of the War for Liberation.

The poor peasantry was almost ceaseless in its politics and struggles against the exploiting relations existing in then-East Pakistan, now independent Bangladesh, and at times, against the neo-colonial state of Pakistan. The poor peasantry, in its area of production, dependent on backward/medieval means of production/instruments of labour– wooden plough, bamboo-made harrow, sickles made by rural ironsmiths, manually operated/gravity driven irrigation, etc. But, the poor peasantry, a socio-political force, rose up repeatedly against either medieval/feudal/semi-feudal exploiting production relations or against the neo-colonial state machine the ruling feudal-comprador-bureaucratic elements organised since mid-August-1947. At the last stage of this period of struggle, the poor peasantry made a leap forward, and armed itself and waged an armed struggle against the neo-colonial state fully backed by imperialist power; and that leap forward was a qualitative change in the poor peasantry’s form of struggle. In reality, the poor peasantry handled contradictions it was encountering or going through all through the period–mid-August-1947 to mid-December-1971. This was, in short, the poor peasantry’s politics.

At times, the Bangladesh poor peasantry’s struggles were economic. However, at most of the times, the struggles were political. The demands the poor peasantry raised over a period of more than two decades ranged from reformist to radical. At times, demands raised/struggles waged were against unjust distribution system in a certain locality; at times, it was against existing mode of production, against informal rural credit market; and at times, it was against state machine/state repression/repressive regime of law/local henchmen of the state.

The poor peasantry included the marginal farmers, near-landless/landless farmers, sharecroppers, farm labourers, weavers, fishers, handicrafts-persons, smiths, boatmen, petty traders in village market places and other small professionals/producers.

The Bangladesh poor peasantry continued the historic Tebhaga Andolon [TA], sharecroppers’ movement for a fair share of their produce, which initiated its march in October 1946. It was a historical development in terms of politics in the-then undivided Bengal, eastern part of which was organised by the colonial masters and its compradors as the eastern wing of the neo-colonial state of Pakistan, today’s independent Bangladesh. Thus, in parts of then-East Bengal/East Pakistan, Pakistan’s eastern province, the poor peasantry emerged as a political force, not much powerful in the entire land, but, significantly powerful in parts of the land. It was emergence of a powerful political force on the political scene in parts of Bengal: In the 20th century’s undivided Bengal, the TA was the poor peasantry’s most organised movement that spread its wings of battle on the vast plains of Bengal: from 15 to 24 districts of 26 districts of pre-bifurcated Bengal.

The Communist Party of India [CPI] and its peasant front, the Bengal Provincial Kishaan Sabhaa [BPKS], led this economic-political struggle. The CPI and its peasant front, the Kishaan Sabhaa, had the radical aim: a society free from exploitation – a complete political demand/programme. With the TA, the poor peasantry had that vision of freeing itself from exploitation. After the 1947-partition, the eastern provincial committee of the Communist Party of Pakistan [CPP]/All Pakistan Kishaan Sabhaa [APKS]/East Pakistan Kishaan Sabhaa [EPKS] led the movement in East Bengal.

The Pakistan state’s political leadership, then, the Muslim League [ML], representing the exploiting interests, and the state machine withstood, and encountered the TA with armed violence, a state-sponsored violence. With the state machine’s opposition and armed suppression of the TA, the poor peasants’ politics took specific shape: Against the state that safeguards interests of the exploiting classes, the interests that deprives the poor peasantry. The historic movement that heroically fought and resisted the brutal force of the state machine came to its conclusion in 1950.

A Political Achievement
Making a high sacrifice, the poor peasantry made during course of the movement, the TA’s achievement was immense and significant. While the communal forces in the land were spreading venom of sectarianism, hatred and violence against the commoners, it couldn’t spread this poison of divisive politics in the areas that experienced the TA – a major and one of the immediate achievements of the movement. It’s a historic and political achievement, a feat by the exploited rural masses that often goes without discussion, as the British imperialism and its local compradors spread all engulfing divisive, communal politics as part of their class war against the people throughout this subcontinent; and the working people in the rural areas of its activity effectively foiled the imperialism-local exploiter axis’s political design.

In terms of ideology and politics, the TA had a far-reaching significance that included spread of democratic and secular political idea/view among the poor peasantry; rejection of the divisive, sectarian, communal idea/view; emergence of a poor peasantry force as a political bloc against the reactionary, exploiting classes in the rural areas, and the rightist political forces representing those exploiting classes.

The baheenee, volunteer force, at village level the poor peasants organised in areas of the TA, had no discrimination of gender, religion and caste and age. These baaheenee members, donning red cap and wielding club, had to extend protection to the peasants from the police and jotedaars, the big landholders, class enemy of the poor peasantry. These baaheenees played bold role in the TA. The village level judicial system the poor peasantry initiated in the areas of the TA made the Muslim League-led provincial government in East Bengal angry and worried. It was the poor peasantry’s organisa-tion and assertion of power.

The suspended TA was resumed months after setting up the neo-colonial state of Pakistan, as the jotedaars with support from the ML again unleashed repression on the peasants; thousands of legal suits were filed against the peasants, police raids were carried out to arrest the peasant leadership, and the EPKS assessed that the ML, as a political party of the nababs and zamindars, was not serious in abolishing the zamindari system. Therefore, the poor peasantry had to develop pressure on the ML-led government. The poor peasantry had its message and duty, and, as a whole, a politics.

Naankaar Victory
There were a number of movements by poor peasantry/agriculture labourers/sharecroppers in different parts of East Bengal, which included Naankars, persons engaged like slaves in exchange of food, in Sylhet, a northeastern district, who were joined by members of other communities including a number of tribes, schedule castes. Defying and resisting state’s atrocities and barbarian assaults, the poor peasants carried on their struggle and eventually the East Bengal government had to enact a law abolishing the Nankar system in the mid-1950.

Tonko and Aadheeaars
Eastern Bengal also experienced movements by Haajang and Gaaro peasantry in the northern Netrokona-Chhaatak belt, in the anti-Tonko and levy movement, the Aadheeaar movement, a peasant movement to halve interest on credit given in paddy to the poor peasants. The anti-Tonko movement was started in January 1949.

The poor peasantry in Khulna, Faridpur, Jessore and Chittagong districts of the country also initiated movements. Death of a police official during a clash between a raiding police force and resisting peasants in a village in Khulna, in the southwestern part of East Bengal, took a serious turn, as the resisting peasants and the assaulting police force was, by creed, Hindu and Moslem respectively. The governments of Pakistan and India, with the help of the mainstream media, coloured the incident of peasants’ resistance against an oppressive machine standing for an exploitative system with communalism. Nurul Amin, then-chief minister of the eastern province of Pakistan, accused the communists and defended the police action. Hell bent on crushing the communist party-led peasants’ struggle, the central and provincial governments of Pakistan machinated many measures that included torture and detention of peasants/peasant activists/leaders. The East Pak government circulated a leaflet in May 1949 condemning the communists and their political party, identified the communists as anti-state elements. The propaganda was part of political fight the ruling segments of the society were carrying on against the communists.

Other than these struggles, thousands of peasants, irrespective of creed, demanded abolition of the zamindari system without any compensation over a long period. It was a political demand, a political move that hurt a certain part of the exploiting interests in the neo-colonial state.

Arson and Killing
During these protests/movements/moves with politics by the poor peasantry, police killed and/or wounded scores of peasants/peasant activists/leaders, resorted to arson of peasants’ dwellings; and at least in one case, an entire village was set on fire. In addition to these, hundreds of peasants were arrested and sentenced to prisons, the police assaulted hundreds of peasants, police camps were set up in different areas, and in areas, police camps were set up almost in all villages.

In areas of movement, peasants’ clashes with police were almost a regular incident. At least in one area, the protesting peasants, like part of a guerrilla war, demolished a bridge over a river, so that police force can’t enter the area.

Armed Resistance, Guerrilla Tactics
In one area, the protesting peasants began adopting armed form of resistance, to be particular, resorting to guerrilla tactics. They moved to forested, hill area; set up camps. Death sentences on police agents recruited from among villagers were executed in a number of villages. Intermittent armed clashes between the peasant guerrillas and police occurred during May-September 1949 period. Armed peasant groups raided zaminders’ residences. After gradual steam out, the armed resistance sustained till the first quarter of 1950.

Mobilisations
The time–since 1950–testified a number of peasant moves, mobilisations, significant conferences. The forward-looking, adherents of radical politics organised these moves.

Maulana Bhasani, a pro-Peking (now, Beijing) left-leaning mass leader having significant following among the poor peasantry, convened East Pakistan Agriculture and Peasants Conference in early-1958 at Rangpur, a northern district. The conference revived the Kreeshak Sameetee (KS), peasants’ organi-sation, and adopted a programme. However, within months, all activities of the KS had to keep suspended, as Martial Law authority, led by General Ayub Khan, prohibited all political activities in the country, as Martial Law was imposed in October 1958. In early-June 1962, the Martial Law was withdrawn; and political activities resumed. The KS resumed its work, and raised its demands by observing Peasants’ Demand Day on November 1, 1963. The observance of the day was followed by other organisational, publicity, etc work throughout the country.

Many peasant conferences were held in different places of the country on different occasions. These conferences helped organise the peasants, and raised demands for the peasants. The North Bengal Peasants Conference was held at Akkelpur under Bogura district, which was participated by 150,000 peasants. The Conference of Peasant Volunteers (Male and Female) at Shahpur under Pabna district, convened by Maulana Bhasani, was held on October 5, 1969. More than one hundred-thousand peasants, industrial workers, students and intellectuals joined the conference, which was held defying martial law imposed by General Yahya Khan. Thousands of peasants from Khulna and Jessore districts joined the conference by marching hundreds of miles amidst stormy weather and rain. Its second conference was held at Asad Nagar [Sontosh] under Tangail district on January 19, 1970. On February 19, 1970, more than a hundred-thousand peasants and industrial workers joined a conference at Domar under Rangpur district.

The KS pulled wide parts of the poor peasantry, as its activities spread to almost all parts of the country. Peasants’ struggles at local level in different parts of the country were regular phenomena during the period.

The land was afire with the 1969-mass upsurge, which was participated by the urban working and other classes and the rural mass of people. The mass upsurge, unprecedented in extent and force in the history of the country, imbued these student-youth activists/leaders to radical peasant politics.

During this mass upsurge, the peasantry actively participated in political activities aimed at overthrowing the ruling regime led by a Field Marshal, earlier General, Ayub Khan, and the regime’s local agents –the local government leaders.

The poor peasantry began gaining class-consciousness and imagination of class power. Parts of the radical Left movement began raising the slogan “Kreeshak-srameek astra dharo, shaadheen janaganataantrik Poorba Baanglaa kaayem karo”– “Peasants and workers, rise up with arms and establish independent, people’s democratic East Bengal”.

The rural poor found a politics that belonged to them, a space for participation in political activities, initiation of steps for economic uplift and political power, get rid of/free from clutches of moneylenders and other actors torturing the poor/powerless.

At one stage of the upsurge, the rural populace fully rejected the ruling machine including its local government [LG] system, then, officially tagged as the Basic Democracy [BD] System, and the LG leaders, state’s pillars at local level/community. The LG arrangement was effectively overwhelmed, and made ineffective by the rural masses of people, overwhelmingly the poor, landless peasantry. After the 1969-Mass Upsurge, there was no BD system.

Slogans
The demands the KS raised were economic and political as well. The programme the KS formulated reflected demands and aspirations of the poor peasantry, agricultural labourers, middle peasants, sections of rich peasants. The demands raised/the programmes declared/the slogans raised by the poor peasantry over the period mentioned in this article included [not mentioned here by stages/sequence of situation and political development/state machine’s violent interventions or interventions under the guise of “legality”/level of participation, agitation, activity, etc., and not classified according to segments/classes joined/pulled/allied/targeted/opposed]:

l Resistance to abnormal hike of prices of food and other essential products.
l Minimum/fair price of jute.
l Withdrawal of all new and enhanced tax, etc. imposed during the Martial Law rule/exemption of all due taxes.
l Judicial enquiry of police firing on peasants in Magura, Balishira and Kazipur; and release of all political leaders.
l Abolition of all feudal exploitation/sharecropping system.
l Peasants’ rights over land, and fishers’ rights over water bodies.
l Credit on easier terms.
l Elimination of big landholders and moneylenders, the class enemies, their tricks, torture, interest-based money lending, and mortgage.
l Land reform/redistribution of land/elimination of inequality in ownership of land/agricultural reform.
l Seizure of lands and deed documents of lands that the big landholders and moneylenders have mischievously taken hold off from the poor peasantry.
l Organise guerrilla squads.
l Establish guerrilla zone and base area.
l Establish Red Power in rural area.
l Establish a society free from exploitation and inequality.

The demands the KS raised also were related to national economy including semi-feudalism and capitalism, national politics including election, voting rights, governing and structural issues, and imperialism, and imperialist military axis/pacts.

In numerous peasants meetings across the land, the issues discussed included exploitation, oppression of peasants, repressive laws, thugs, cow thieves and local operatives of the reactionary ruling regime, flood, price of products, and peasants’ other grievances.

Resolutions the KS adopted at conferences and meetings included issues related to:

l Price hike of essentials including food.
l Famine.
l Flood control.
l Weavers.
l Seed.
l Import and export.
l Local government.
l Land survey.
l Corruption.
l Fisheries.
l Rivers and other water bodies.
l Irrigation.
l Village market places.
l Rehabilitation of peasants who were allured to West Pakistan, the western wing of Pakistan, and of the peasants from Assam and Tripura states of India.
l Political prisoners.
l Arrest warrant issued against peasant leaders.

Momentum
As the people began the armed phase of the War for Liberation, the peasantry overwhelmingly joined this war, and added thrust in the political moves against the neo-colonial state. To the peasantry, there was no need to convince them to join this historic war, as years of communists’ and progressive forces’ political work among the poor peasantry prepared political backdrop of the struggle, which is another part of the story related to the exploited in the land. In areas, the peasantry took many initiatives, at the very first moment of the war, faster than other parts/segments/classes of the society; and it was initiation of an armed struggle that imperialism opposed, conspired to foil, and attempted to crush.

During the first hours of resistance in late-March 1971 and early-April 1971, as the Pakistan army began genocidal military campaign, armed people, mostly from the rural areas, the poor peasantry, mobilised themselves, moved en masse, in thousands, towards cantonments and army camps, and made charges on the marauding Pakistani soldiers. In district towns, the people en bloc charged prisons to bring out political prisoners from their internment, charged police armories to seize weapons to arm them. Their participation in the War for Liberation was deluging. Among the freedom fighters, the peasantry was the majority. “Peasants’ political activities,” writes Taj ul-Islam Hashmi in Pakistan As A Peasant Utopia, The Communali-sation of Class Politics in East Bengal, 1920-1947, “motivated by conscious efforts to improve their socio-economic conditions, led to the creation of [..] the state of Bangladesh.”

Guerrilla Force and Guerrilla Zone
In a number of areas, the communist revolutionaries organised armed force/guerrilla force with the poor peasantry, and established guerrilla zones and base areas. These communist-led forces began resisting/counter-striking the occupying Pakistan army from the very first moment the occupying army began military campaign, continued fighting back the occupying army and its auxiliary forces, for months, and kept the areas liberated. In areas, it was up to June-July 1971; and in areas, it was until the full liberation of the country. This part of the struggle participated by the poor peasantry under the leadership of the communists goes least/not discussed in the mainstream.

The Bangladesh poor peasantry’s politics and political moves during the period covered in this article was:

[1]  against exploitation/exploiting classes; and
[2]  for a radical change in production relations/a society free from exploitation/emancipation of the exploited.
The poor peasantry’s politics was forward-looking, for democracy, and was opposed to
[1]  sectarianism/supremacist/divisive/retrogressive ideology and political/class forces; and
[2]  imperialism.
The poor peasantry took active part in all critical junctures of national politics; and was not on a backseat in struggle for national liberation. Rather, the Bangladesh poor peasantry’s participation in political struggles on national questions was at times bold and wide, historic, and facilitating the struggle for emancipation of the exploited, for a people’s democracy, although its programme, leadership, trends, sways, etc. need further dissection/identification, which is another part of the story. So, the Bangladesh poor peasantry’s story goes on, marches, stumbles, and waits for steady stride –a historic socio-political process.

[This article is based on a paper, “Radicalisation of the poor peasantry’s politics in Bangladesh, 1947-’71" presented at an international conference on imperialism and agrarian transition held in April 2024. Considering space, notes/sources are withheld here, but are in the original.] 

Back to Home Page

Frontier
Vol 57, No. 15 - 18, Oct 5 - Nov 2, 2024