Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer
0 items - $0.00 0

Hussein Shaheed Suhrawardy: The Butcher of Bengal Province

TOMASZ FLASIŃSK

Dr. Jekyll, Mr Hyde or Bengali Hamlet?

Hussein Shaheed Suhrawardy as the last Prime Minister

of undivided Bengal

“The correspondence between Government of Pakistan and Governor of East Bengal from 1950 recalls how

Suhrawardy used to receive even “the most respectable man” when being the PM: he greeted his visitors “lying

on his bed with his legs outstretched and people seeing him in his bed had to talk to him standing by his side”.

Then Suhrawardy was addressing them in “a bantering tone” if not showing “his authority by shouting at them”

(quoted from Ilhan Niaz, The Culture of Power and Governance of Pakistan, 1947–2008, Islamabad 2010, p. 246).

The author sees this as his general tendency, but since all the supplicants subjected to such treatment he mentions

by name were members of the rival faction in BPML (Khawaja Nazimuddin, business tycoons Adamjee and

Dawood), this may have been the main reason of the PM’s conduct. Whatever it was, such humiliation of the

people whose backing Suhrawardy may have well needed in future (aside from political meaning those three had

by themselves, they were also close to Jinnah) shows his shortsightedness and/or thoughtlessness when the social

skills were concerned.

Yet the Bengali Hamlet (Suhrawardy)– like his Shakespearean counterpart – was more than a political

fighter who just met stronger opponents. The failure of most of his projects was caused

not only by outside circumstances, but also his personality, with his tendency to overuse

empty words and mock practically everyone, as well as his compulsion to always have

the last word even when he desperately needed to keep those whom he quarreled with

onside. His marital separation (1946) may have been another reason behind his mood

swings along with depression, and a sense of loss in some crucial moments; those traits

have been confirmed by too many sources to try to dismiss them as histrionic poses.

All this doesn’t mean that Suhrawardy should be whitewashed. For example, the

employment of Punjabi constables and his later refusal to dismiss them are understandable,

but the fact that he never – from what we know – used any subtler means to curb their

excesses (and their venomous slogans) makes him guilty by negligence. The same is

true with his handling of the Great Calcutta Riot, Noakhali and his general attitude

towards non-Muslims; even considering his uneasy political situation he could have

done more to help them and boost their confidence. Not that the PM promoted brutal

actions against Hindus; rather it seems (aside from other factors) that he simply didn’t

care enough to deal with it in more active way. In the end, this attitude only deepened

the communal rift.

In the course of time he seemingly acknowledged some of his mistakes: the fact

that shortly after Partition he officially proposed that Hindus be allowed to join the

Pakistan Muslim League may serve as a proof. For an earlier example, there is a telling

scene in Horace Alexander’s memoirs from the time of Partition, when Suhrawardy and

DR. JEKYLL, MR HYDE OR BENGALI HAMLET? HUSSEIN SHAHEED SUHRAWARDY… 107

Gandhi were organizing peace meetings in Calcutta (again, to the irritation of Jinnah and

Nazimuddin). A group of Hindu youths shouted at the ex-PM: “What about last August?

Are you not ashamed of yourself?’. ‘Yes’ – replied Suhrawardy without hesitation. ‘I am

ashamed of it. We must all be ashamed”.300

Perhaps this was the best way to summarize his tenure – not that most Hindus were

convinced. Manikuntala Sen, a Communist worker who left valuable memoirs, angrily

noted:

“But who was that man standing behind the Mahatma? It was none other

than the notorious Suhrawardy Saheb who had been a commander of

the Direct Action. He appeared like a perfectly innocent cat, sitting with

his tail rolled up, as if he was a soft, gentle domestic pet, such was the

hypocritical expression on his face. (…) As I watched him, I burnt with

indignation. I felt frustrated that Suhrawardy got what he had wanted.

And what did Gandhiji get?”

TOMASZ FLASIŃSKI

(The Tadeusz Manteuffel Institute of History,

Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland)

ORCID: 0000-0003-2258-824X

Dr. Jekyll, Mr Hyde or Bengali Hamlet?

Hussein Shaheed Suhrawardy as the last Prime Minister

of undivided Benga