 Okay, welcome everybody to SOAS, South Asia Institute. My name is Edward Simpson, and I'm the director of the Institute. SOAS is a small university in the center of London, and the South Asia Institute is home to a vibrant community of scholars working on South Asian themes, and we also host a program of events. Tonight, we're very proud to be hosting the fourth annual lecture in the Bangalwadu Sheikh Mujeeb Rahman series. Our founding partners and co-hosts for this evening for the 7th of March Foundation. We're also fortunate enough to be co-hosting or partnering this prestigious event with the High Commission Bangladesh in the UK. The running order for this evening will be the Ansar I would pull out the General Secretary and founding member of the 7th of March Foundation. We'll say a few words, and the lecture will be delivered by Professor Nyanika Mukherjee from the University of Durham. Although Ansar will introduce Nyanika, I want to say a few words myself. Nyanika graduated with a PhD from SOAS, and I think the department is very proud of the career that she has gone on to have, and she is the author of a fantastic and theoretically sophisticated book called The Spectral Wound, which I highly recommend. Previous speakers in this series have included Professor James Maynard, Dr. Suhailanaz Neen, and Professor Rahman Saban. And if you know those names, we are very proud to be able to add Nyanika Mukherjee's name to that list. Nyanika will speak for around 45 minutes, and this evening's session will be followed by a short Q&A. So that is my job done. I warmly welcome you to the Virtual South Asia Institute, and I now hand you over to Ansar. Thank you, Professor Edward Simpson. On behalf of 7th of March Foundation, and of course our partners, South Asia Institute at the University of London and Bangladesh High Commission in London, we are pleased to welcome all of you to the fourth annual Bongo Bandu Shek Mojiburahman lecture. This is especially because we are celebrating both the birth centenary of Bongo Bandu as well as approaching the end of the golden jubilee celebration of Bangladesh's independence. Sadly, this year is also the fifth anniversary of Bangladesh's genocide. So I wish to pay my respect to those innocent and unarmed civilians whose lives were lost, taken away often brutally by the Pakistani occupying forces in 71. During the Bangladesh liberation war, three planned systematic killings of ethnic Bengali people and faith communities that included Muslims, Hindu, Buddhist and Christians were carried out by the Pakistani military. Prior to the genocide, the people of Bangladesh were demonized as low-lying people of a low-lying land who polluted the area with non-Muslim values. And with this dehumanization, the killing spree continued till the end of the war. Following the end of the war, the international community and United Nations failed Bangladesh in bringing the perpetrators to justice. Hence, the Bangladesh government led by Bongo Bandu took initiatives to bring the perpetrators to justice. Bongo Bandu's government initially identified 195 personnel of Pakistani military as war criminals enacted the 1972 act to try local collaborators and the 1973 International Crimes Act to try the alleged war criminals. Unfortunately, with the assassination of Bongo Bandu in 1975, these steps were halted. Bongo Bandu had also taken initiatives to rehabilitate women who had suffered sexual violence. The topic of our keynote presentation today by Professor Nurnika Mukherjee. And on that note, I'm going to do a quick intro before requesting how to speak. So Nurnika Mukherjee is a professor of political anthropology in Dharam University and co-director of the Institute of Advanced Studies. Based on her book, The Spectral Wound, Sexual Violence, Public Memories and the Bangladesh War of 1971, she co-authored a graphic novel and animation film titled Birangona and Ethical Testimonies for Sexual Violence During Conflict and received the 2019 Praxis Award from the Washington Association of Professional Anthropologists. In 2014, she was awarded the Mahatma Gandhi Pravasi Samman. This is for the Old West Indians at the House of Lords for her social anthropological contribution on gendered violence during wars. She has published extensively on anthropology of violence, ethics and aesthetics, including editing and contributing to journals. She is currently finalizing her manuscript, Arts of E-Reconciliation, and as a British fellow is carrying out research on transnational adoption. She did her BA honors in politics in Presidency College Kolkata, India, MA in Sociology and Anthropology from Jahlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. And as Edward mentioned, her PhD in Social Anthropology from SOAS. So with that, Professor Noenika Mukherjee, the floor, the screen is yours. Thank you. If I could hijack proceedings a little bit because we've joined by her excellency, the High Commissioner, and I think it would be excellent if we could have a few words of introduction from one of our partners for this event before the lecture. So welcome your excellency. It's so nice that you could join us. Thank you, Professor Simpson, Director of the SOAS South Asia Institute. And I'd like to congratulate you as well as the Seven March Foundation and express our honor from on behalf of Bangladesh High Commission London to again partner for the second year, the annual Bangalore Sheikh Mujibur Rahman lecture. And along with you and the very, very brilliant Seven March Foundation. What can I say? I want to thank you for taking us on in this journey of disseminating historic Seven March speech of our founding father, Bangalore Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. But at the same time, I also want to thank the Historic Seven March Foundation, Mr. Ansar Ahmad Ulan, Mr. Narubin, who are our own very brilliant pro 1971 British Bangladeshi pioneers who are doing a fantastic job in spreading the letter and spirit of Bangalore's Seven March speech. That actually changed the course of history. And we just had a talk the other day at the Bangladesh High Commission on Seven March, that how this epoch making speech changed the course of history, created a new state in South Asia, the secular and democratic peoples about the Bangladesh, but also gave courage and inspiration to our Mukti Bahini and to our Birangana women and everyone to fight on until the victory was achieved in December 1971. Coming back to today's event, before that I would like to pay my homage and deepest respects to our undisputed leader of Bengali civil rights movement and architect of Bangladesh's independence. The greatest Bengali of all times, according to BBC, father of the nation, Bangalore Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, without whose leadership there would be no Bangladesh. Also, I would like to under historic month of March, which is the most important month in the history of our Bengali nation. I would like to pay my homage to the three million martyrs, the Bengali victims of Bengali genocide, the intellectuals who were killed and our valiant freedom fighters. And most importantly, the more than 200,000 Bengali women who were sexually violated, who made the supreme sacrifice during a war of liberation of 1971. Having said that, I do want to thank SOAS and Seven March Foundation as our co-partners for actually getting Professor Nanika Mukherjee, you know, who has been a stalwart, where she has, you know, we're just listening to Mr. Ansar Ahmadullah as to the award she has, all the books that she has authored, particularly her book, which I have had the honor to read the Spectral One, Sexual Violence, Public Memories and the Bangladesh War of 1971 that she has co-authored. It's a very graphic novel, but it is on the Biranganas. And I want to particularly take this opportunity to express my gratitude on behalf of the Bangladesh High Commission to Professor Nanika for authoring this book, for taking the story of the Biranganas to the international fora, to the United States, back in the UK and disseminating the story to the mainstream academic circles in the UK. And today also we'll be listening to her. And of course we will again, she's bringing it to today's, you know, this historic month of March, when we have the Bangabundhu series. And speaking of, you know, Bangabundhu, we know that of course, generally women are always used as a weapon of war. And they're always the, you know, they carry the greatest brunt of sexual violence when it comes to war. And the same thing happened in 1971. And, you know, however, you know, we must acknowledge today, during the Bangabundhu talk and lectures that immediately after the independence when Bangabundhu returned to Bangladesh. In February, 1972, he did create the Women Rehabilitation Board to integrate and to rehabilitate this war victims, the Biranganas. And he also declared the Biranganas, that what Birangana comes from his speeches, where he says that they're as much, they are as much of a war hero as the freedom fighters of Bangladesh. And, you know, he tried to rehabilitate them. He said that the war babies, they should write his name as the father and the family should be accepting them. They're so, you know, to get over the social stigma. He did say in his speeches to accept them as one of our own and war heroes. However, you know, after 1975, this process was stalled. But he also tried to, I mean, Ansar Ahmadullah was covering that, how he tried, Bangabundhu tried to have these 1973 war crimes act to try the prisoner, the 195 prisoners of war. However, you know, the diplomatic agreements to sign and therefore they were taken back to Pakistan. But the fact remains that this matter was never closed and the Biranganas, they won with that trauma and seeking justice. So in 2015, few steps that Honorable Prime Minister Shikrishina has taken. First of all, in 2010, the International Crimes Tribunal was formed and there are these two very sensational, you know, convict sort of accused you know, who was convicted. There were two crimes of sexual violence against women and rape enslavement. So there is a historical example now that there was an independent international war crimes tribunal where rape was one of the, you know, crimes for which somebody was tried and convicted. And then in January 2015, Honorable Prime Minister Shikrishina under her leadership at the Bangladesh Parliament passed a bill recognizing the Biranganas as freedom fighters. And this is a due recognition that they also fought and in a 1971 war of liberation and they started receiving the Ministry of Liberation War acknowledged them, issued them certificates. So far 400 plus certificates have been issued, but you know, it's very hard to trace them and they get a monthly allowance for the first time. And there were many movies that have been made over the past few years where this has been highlighted that how difficult it is to trace Biranganas for them to come forward, you know and how they have lived their life in some corner completely hiding from the society. This also it continues to continue that it is a shame as if it is their fault but not the perpetrator's fault. So I hope that after today's talk Professor Nanika will make, you know the saga and the unjust torture on the Biranganas and the justice that they never received and the recognition that 1970 were genocide never received. This war crimes never received. I hope that she will internationalize it. This father and she, the next topic is historicizing the Birangana and I hope she would really do a brilliant job as she is to continue to do that in the future as well. Thank you. Hi, Commissioner. Thank you very much for those thoughtful words. Thank you also for co-partnering with us in organizing this event. It's really much appreciated. So to return to Ansar's earlier words Professor Mukherjee, the floor and the screen is yours. Thank you. Thank you, Ed. Thank you everyone here. I'm just going to share my screen before I start speaking and just to get this technical aspect right. You need to enable me to screen share. Is that okay? I need to be enabled to share my screen Ed. Yeah, Sunil, can you do that please? Are you there? While we are waiting, I could maybe just, before I get to any slide. I just want to say my big thank you to the Seventh March Foundation and also to particularly to SOAS Anthropology for thinking about SOAS South Asia Institute for making this invitation to me and to all of you here who made this possible. And particularly this is a really touching time because Anthropology is where I did my PhD in SOAS itself. And even more I met key Bangladeshi students and activists who led me to do my research in Bangladesh for the next over 20 years right now. So I've been working on something but not only on the beyond runners only. So I would expand on that as well. So I'm really, this is a very special location to be invited here and I couldn't turn it down for various reasons. I'm just going to see if this works now. If I'm allowed to share my screen. Yeah, just going to do that. And then continue speaking up into, yeah, okay. So, and the foundation has been also very generous and to offer me a fee, a fee which I want to pass it on to survivors, to Burangona families in Bangladesh itself because that is what the research, the work that generates from this, all of this is there. So yes, I am representing their work but actually that is their work, their experiences. And it is right that they get any kind of material, anything that I could pass on to them in my position. So I've been asked to speak specifically as to why the genocide of Bangladesh is not internationally recognized. And I explore this question as I said in the title of a past president, future trajectories, but through the figure of the, of the Burangona, those who might not know Burangona are the women who were raped by the Pakistani army as well as local Bengali and non-Bengali collaborators during the Bangladesh war of 1971. So over the 20 years I've worked within Bangladesh on the public memories of Bangladesh war of Burangona but also I look at the debates of reconciliation in the context of the Bangladesh war crimes tribunal but also I have been working with transnational adoptees men, some of whom are war babies, children who were adopted out of Bangladesh in North America and Western Europe. So in the vibe of this research, I straddle a difficult position being from Kolkata, India but also Bangladesh is my second home and it kind of reflects a lot of what Amitabh Khorsh has referred to, the looking class border and the way in which Bangladesh has become more of a second home even more than Delhi is. And I call it Bangladesh war specifically because my attempt is not to, in a way there is no denying the fact that the Pakistani army carried out the rape of the many women within Bangladesh but being Indian I'm also very cognizant that my work has and my book would testify doesn't account to Pakistan bashing because as you know within India this can be picked up on various fronts in terms of to monopolize this narrative suit different purposes and different political purposes. Yet at the same time we know there are attacks on Hindu and Muslim minorities being carried out in Bangladesh and India in response to each other and there's a really reflection in a very horrendous toxic way on both sides of the border in response to events on both sides as well but also at this point for me is to respond to the call from India to talk about a Hindu genocide which I have responded to by saying that all Bangladeshi men and women across class and religion, across religious across different boundaries were subjected to the killings and the rapes during the Bangladesh war of 1971. So as you know in the recent year of the last two year celebration there has been a renewed interest in India about the Bangladesh war and particularly about the figure of the Birangwana which was not there actually 20 years ago publishers which I have asked me for publications now would tell me that there is no place for the 1971 war in 2001, 2002 and yet they asked me to write big sections for them right now. So it's kind of important to map these trajectories and what is shifting and why. So for many people who would know the trigger for my research has been and so I have here just to point out the book that came out of the work and it was a book which took a very long time to write because it looks at not only the experiences of survivors of Birangwanas but their families as well as communities as well as the role of state actors the speeches by various state actors who work with social workers, doctors as well as the human rights and feminist human rights community. Along with I was able to do a triangulation with looking at literary and visual representations of the figure of the rape woman, the Birangwana as well as archival research with newspapers and old documents. And this triangulation is what took a very long time to kind of put all of it together to make sense of what I'm referring to as public memories. I do not talk, I argue against the idea of silence in Bangladesh, but I talk about the public memory of the war of the history of the Birangwana itself or the public memory of wartime sexual violence. And as Mr. Ansari pointed out, we have developed a graphic novel. This is the one, this was co-authored with Takabe's visual artist, Najpenna Harkia. She's fantastic visual artist. And this is the graphic novel that we made but also we were able to, and this is available to be available access, accessible online, but also we made an animation film based precisely on the slides of the graphic novel which has made the dissemination of this work actually much more wider. Even survivors of sexual violence in Colombia as well as Congo have been able to look at this work on the Birangwana to think about what are the, what are the requirements within which we need to understand sexual violence or in conflict. And sexual violence or in conflict, it's precisely the trigger on the basis of which I started my research. When in 1992, I was an undergraduate student in Kulkata, we had the attack on the Babri Masjid by the BGP and their various organizations, right from organizations who today, there is also been renewed strengthening of the BGP's role within India, which is kind of a moment of reckoning in terms of where this is going. But this was a big trigger for me in terms of first coming across the experience of inter-community sexual violence of Muslim men or of Hindu men or Muslim women and vice versa. And this was also the time when Bosnia Rwanda was going on where at the same time, the rape was referred to as war crime. The work on partition was coming out from various Indian scholars. But at the same time, a large number of work was referring to that there was assumptions of silence about war-time sexual violence, that it was primarily seemed to be wrapped up in a cloak of, sorry, wrapped up in a cloak of the so-called stereotypical terms of shame, honor, and stigma. Yet what I knew of the Bangladesh War was how in 1971, this is in December 1971, a few days after the war. So this must have been announced on 22nd December, 21st December, when our newspaper article comes out. So this is an announcement coming out from Janab A.H.M. Kamrisman, who was part of the Mujibnabur interim government where the announcement of Birangwana is, he's making the announcement that all women who were raped by the Pakistani army would be referred to as Birangwana as a way of avoiding ostracization or providing support. And this has been one of the most unprecedented till date instances of state articulation or support for survivors of war-time sexual violence in the way the Bangladesh Taliban did as early as 1971. And till date, it has not happened and it remains unprecedented. And what is interesting is that a lot of people express surprise because this kind of goes counters against this idea of so-called the stereotypes and the Islamophobia around Muslim nations that, you know, and the ideas of patriarchy, gender, all of that that comes with the people are surprised that the Bangladesh Taliban referred to women as Birangwana as early as December 1971. And I elaborate on why this happened in my book, extensively looking at multiple sides. It was like a really revolutionary thing that Kamaruzaman did announcing and referring to women as Birangwanas. On 10th of January, 1972, I think Shikman Chief is released from his house arrest. And in February, he sets up the Rehabitation Center and refers to Birangwanas as Mahbun, or my Mahbun, my mothers and sisters. And that obviously provides a big support and he popularizes the charm Birangwana even more that had been established by Kamaruzaman. So this is kind of quite an unprecedented way in which this intervention was made by the state of Bangladesh itself. And here what is interesting to think about is I would have come to this later. Here what is interesting to think about why not genocide and why was given that the kind of the flows, international flows within which Bangladesh and the Central War has been placed. And here I found the book by Srinath Raghavan because I deal primarily with the public memories of sexual violence rather than the diplomatic politics of it. And Srinath Raghavan's book on 1971 is quite interesting because it also locates us within today's geopolitics in which we are placed today, where the book shows how the Russian government did not want Pakistan to break up rather than the Cold War real politic, which was the main reason for America's involvement with the 1971 war. And it was, in fact, the Russian government's concern about Chinese influences against Pakistan. Similarly, India's skepticism and support for Bangladesh's liberation waxed and waned in the early months of the liberation struggle and only gained momentum in the last months of 1971. Overall, this is a really interesting book of the diplomatic back and forth that happens around the Bangladesh war of 1971. And it brings out the central role of refugees as important political tools and shows that the relationship with China were pivotal to diplomatic maneuvers relating to 1971 in terms of these superpowers and the various moves that were made. And this was kind of quite important and interesting for me to come across because primarily we have known that the Soviet bloc as India supported Bangladesh whereas America and Pakistan supported, America and China supported Pakistan. What is conspicuously absent, however, in Raghavan's book and also various other accounts has been the role, the public memory of wartime sexual violence. And here I need to kind of also highlight the work of various feminist work that has come out focusing on this. And I walk in the foot trails in the footsteps of Vina de Costa, Yasmin Saikia as well as various other Bangladeshi feminists who have been writing about the first story from then the Janganagar really began the anthropology collective where they were writing about about the issue of the Raghavan as well. But as Tamima Anam says that this is a war that time for God. So we don't not only have the name that we have here we also have the rehabilitation program which introduced abortion for women as well as adoption for women who were at a later stage of their pregnancy. Many women were also persuaded to take up or be married off but many Raghavan women were not willing to get married and instead demanded jobs from the state. They actually asked the state to be the state that Steve was ensuring. So as a result many women were given jobs according to their class positions. So women got jobs in government offices as well as various kind of training were given and I've actually come across women who have been working in these government offices. Obviously they have retired right now. What is interesting in terms of the history of abortion related to the Bangladesh war and what many social workers find and social workers doctors were in a really difficult position in the way in which number of women were raped but at the same time also bringing back women back into the fold of the nation that often social workers would say we try to protect women from the emotions of multiple. And as we've heard earlier that apart from the name of Riyangana they are referred to as Mukti Chotas by Bhavadish Thakur today. They receive a regular pension which I can attest to with many of the survivors I've been working with. It's a pension that comes every three months in a bulk amount and that has actually generated very different kind of consequences among the lives of the Riyanganas because often there has been very social workers and like Kala Malika Khan who was one of the prominent social workers with the Riyanganas and whose work has been whose materials have been very informative for my own research actually differs that she says women shouldn't be called Riyangana. But at the same time when I refer to the survivors and refer to them that we shouldn't refer to them as Riyangana but called Mukti Chotas they would say but actually we have come out and talked in public so people have come out if you call everyone Mukti Chotas then what we went through would get covered by a euphemism. So there is also a kind of divergent set of responses among survivors whether they should be called Riyanganas and Mukti Chotas. So I have for following the work with the survivors I have done I continue to use the word Riyangana but I know there are criticism of the word Riyangana and I'm very cognizant about that. We know that over the many years in Bangladesh in Bangladesh political trajectory there have been changes in textbooks over emphasis on the role of the army in the subsequent years in Bangladesh and yet there remains a public memory of individual and literary realm for the last 50 years. So the reason they have been recent films and actually I'm going to talk a little bit of the recent films later on but actually the presence of the Riyangana has been there from as early as 1972 with Ornudar Ukhni Chakki actually showing the acceptance of the war baby. But at the same time the visual realm I want to show some of the images that is there. We have various kinds of images particularly the face of the Riyangana has been represented in various ways or the body of the Riyangana and don't use any of the graphic images that are also prevalent in this visual archive but most famously the symbolic image by Naimuddin Ahmad of which has often been referred to or too late to be that hair photograph itself. And I was very fortunate to be able to interview Naipa as well as various other photographers and their family members to kind of contextualize the role of these photographs within this public memory of sexual violence during the Bangladesh war. And within this we also find images of Riyangana appearing in newspapers. Here I think this is Bobita who is he's dressed up in a shirt and a loom he precisely showing that she has been given these clothes to wear by another man and figures her as a Riyangana or as someone who has been raped in Ornudar Ukhni Chakki which came out in 1972. Similarly, we also have various advertisements emerging in 1972. And from we have advertisements from biscuits as I say biscuits to banks uses the image of the Riyangana to talk about the way in which here it's the advertisement of Ornudar Ukhni Bank with the characters say is violated Shamoli and Hamid Sobs want to say never again, no more genocide. So and similarly we have the image of the rickshaw art in Bangladesh coming out which was discontinued in early 1970s because I think the government felt there was too much attention felt towards these images of sexual violence during the war itself. But what we also know that in the imagery of the war heroine, what has persisted is however there is a horrific imagery of the Riyangana that has persisted where we can only imagine her either that she has been physically affected or that she or people or there's a lot of assumption that she has not been taken in within her family or ostracized by her family itself. And actually, while this is also the case that has happened, but also there are various other instances where many Riyanganas actually continuously with their family with whom they were married when they were raped during 1971. So one of the urges I have been arguing in my book is we need to think beyond the horrific image of the Riyangana and think through the various violences through which she has lived through. And to show this, I want to show you a little clip that is there from the animation film which would highlight the way in which different ways the violences of the Riyangana needs to be understood to make sense of how women of different backgrounds have lived through the and daily lived through the socialities of violence, as I call it, in their everyday lives and how they are carrying on their lives. I'm going to stop sharing this briefly and then I'm going to go share another thing. This is a clip. So I'm going to make this big. So this will talk about the lives of some of the Riyanganas, some of the survivors I've worked with. Firdousi Priyabhashini, sculptor. During the war of 1971, Pakistani military and her colleagues at war raped her for many months. She had to go to war as she was responsible for the sustenance of her widowed mother and young siblings. After the war, she was mistakenly referred to as a collaborator by her neighbors. As a result, she and her husband, who was a liberation fighter, had to constantly change their home and cities they lived in to escape these rumors. Only in 1999, she told her daughter about 1971. She used to say, if the end of your finger is touched without your consent, the finger would burn. Imagine how it would feel if it is the rest or whole of your body. Her story and sculptures inspired many in Bangladesh, particularly the younger generation. She died in March, 2018. Maena Kareem, a landless, rural woman. During the war, she was raped by the Pakistani army in the courtyard of her own home. She was cutting fish when she was captured, holding onto the wooden pole of her house. She thought, I would give my life, but not my honor. After the war, her husband took on the responsibility of cutting fish, and after her son got married, this job was passed on to her daughter-in-law. Maena hasn't cut fish since the war, holding onto the wooden pole of her house. She says that the pole is the witness of her event. Whenever she sees the pole, she clearly sees the event of that day. In 1992, Maena gave witness against the war criminals at the People's Court. Today, she's appealing to the government to give jobs to her sons and daughters. Chhaya Ranidatta, a sex worker. During the war, Chhaya's mother died, and Chhaya became alone and vulnerable. Taking advantage of her vulnerability, local collaborators in her village gang raped her. Chhaya feels sad when thinking of her mother as she feels her mother would have protected her, and she wouldn't have been raped. She was good in mathematics, and hence after the war, she started a business of supplying potatoes to restaurants. Sometime later, she decided to take up sex work herself. She follows both Hindu and Muslim religions. As a result of the rapes, she had a girl, a war baby who is today 46 years old. Shirin Ahmed had a government job. During the war, she witnessed her husband being killed by the Pakistani army. She was also pregnant. The military raped her and she lost her baby. After the war, she married a cousin, but she always loves her first husband and can't keep his photograph at home. Her second husband does not like it and is jealous of her love for her childhood sweetheart, her deceased first husband. Hence, she kept the photograph of her first husband in her cupboard at work. A few years ago, she retired from her job. Marjina Khatin, hospital cleaner. During the war, Marjina's brother was going away to fight. He had recently married. Look after my wife's elder sister. When the Pakistani military came to their house, Marjina hid her sister-in-law and another beautiful cousin and put herself forward. Where are the women in the house? I'm here. You can take me. Get into the jeep outside. For four months, every night, a military jeep came to pick her up to be raped and dropped her back in the morning. Send Marjina. Don't go, Marjina. I have to go or they will find the other women. After the war, neighbors referred to her as a collaborator and so she left for Dhaka to find war. When I heard we were called biranganas, I did not tell anyone, but I glowed with pride. She married. Her children later got separated from her husband. And today, her children have government jobs. She worked as a cleaner in a government hospital and has recently retired. The military took me by force, but they got nothing from me. So in trying to show that clip, I am trying to show that clip. I have tried to show how the survivors actually lived on with their experiences of sexual violence rather than it being construed or taken together as a horrific imagery. And what we find is that even within communities of women, their communities might be giving them quota or scorn about speaking about this. But many of them would justify that women, how Shkore Jainai, Jorhpur Bhakni Jaavwai said, did not go by force. They could have, they would take, they did not go by themselves. They were taken by force and this could have happened to anyone. And even the ideas of quota or shorom are identified by the survivors themselves as having a socioeconomic context and rather than being intrinsic to Muslim societies per se. And in saying that, they say that, when various activists are approaching them to take their testimonies, their communities think that they are being, they are being given lots of money, they're getting jobs. And as a result, they face an ostracization within their communities. And also because this horrific imagery has sometimes been sustained in human rights testimonies itself. So for many survivors, it has been that they refer to what their experience as malai pihash or chaurum pihash. It's a lot of history, it's a severe history. And this is the reason in some ways the ethical testimonies that we developed emerges from survivors working through what they feel should be the way their testimonies should be recorded. And today, in fact, we do not go to many of the Shambhartan as our felicitations because their primary search has been the search for jobs for their children today, which has faced constant hurdle with technicalities and rules, even when we have been working with the Liberation War Ministry. And as the women says, iti hash ki kotha hai, kaji ki chuna hai, is history only in words, is how would it not materialize in action. And for them, this action emerges from the role of what the lives of their children would be. So this is again from the graphic novel, so I'm gonna skip this. And one of the things that came out also in trying to work with the Liberation War Ministry, which and where the women themselves think that this graphic novel actually should be made part of the school curriculum in Bangladesh, where they say we cried and laughed on reading this book and seeing this film. It should be read and seen by all children and their parents. By reading this book and seeing this film, children will not question the war again. No one will question who fought, no one will ever give kothas for the Liberation War. Along with their children, their parents would read, their mothers would read, and they would get to know about the war. All our stories are here in this book, and I want this book to be in every school in Bangladesh that all children know about us. And yet within this valorization, we also have the role of the Birangonas as traitors, or as collaborators, as you notice. As we know, in February 2013, there was the Shahbagh movement and the demand for death penalty of war criminals, where a huge number of young generation came together to demand the death penalty of war criminals, which has also had various sides to it. The Shahbagh movement, but at the same time, a lot of imagery that came out in the Shahbagh movement was about the imagery of the Razaqars, or the war criminals, which has been there since 1972. Another dominant imagery has been in magazines from 97, but also in 1972, various images of the Razaqar are coming out. But along with the figure of the Razaqar, we also have the image of the Birangonas, where feminist publications like Aayno Shanshengro would show the Birangonas imagery to be the force, but at the same time, there's a lot of ambiguity towards, as we heard from the accounts by Morgina, or of Frida Siappa, there's an allegation of being collaborators during the war as well, towards them, because of the rule of the rumors. And this is where I want to come in into the why also genocide has not taken hold, apart from the horrific testimonies of the Birangonas, and the way in which survivors feel about the horrific testimonies, but also about thinking through the role of Birangonas as traitors within communities, where they have been subjected to rumors, to suspicion, as to where they were during the war, if they were staying away at an uncle's place, and if they ever had a baby. Along with the figure of the Birangona, there is the figure also of the war babies. And the war babies, the press referenced the war babies in 1972, as to Dujatov or war baby, or Jarod Shontan, alleged to have children, bastards, also reflects the ambiguity towards them. So this is a quote from newspapers in 1972, will the alleged with children of these barbaric hyenas emerge in the future as fierce natural beasts and pollute Bengali society? Once these children know their fathers are devils and barbaric beasts, then wouldn't these children also become like fierce tigers? Can they not be sent to put to Spakistan, where they could be nurtured by Yaya Tekka's resources? In short, we cannot allow the seeds of the beasts to be kept in this land. And here, while making also, there are instances in newspapers in making case for adoption towards these babies, are referred to as Jesus in the newspapers. But at the same time, the reference is that the whole nation has nothing but severe arena discussed for those born of the semen or the barbaric beastly cons of the Pakistanis, who would in the future be like them, like a kalsha? As we know, the snake we look after turns on its nurturer is the kind of parallel being drawn here. Many adoptees we've worked with have been trying to access their files, trying to get citizenship and recognition of what happened to them. And this has been a place where they have, again, like the Bidonganists, to face constant legal hurdle within Bangladesh itself. And here, in thinking through another form of bear, the issue of genocide 1971 needs to be worked within Bangladesh as well, is the idea of what I refer to as irreconciliation. So, a quote from Projan Muakattur, Ben says, and is the day a member of Projan Muakattur, I'm anonymizing the person, the day Pakistan builds a memorial in Islam about 71 that I might think of forgiving them. So these are members of Projan Muakattur, who's a generation 71, whose parents were killed during 1971, the martyred intellectuals. And here, I had referred to as, I will forgive them, but the person can correct me to say, I might even think of forgiving them. And here, since 2009, as we know, there has been a war crimes tribunal in Bangladesh, which has executed various collaborators. Bangladesh's complex case of seeking accountabilities and attempt to keep the rules of 1971, irreconciled, open, something that discuss, something that we talk about in a special issue that's coming out this year on irreconciliation. But more than that, and the keeping, they have suggested that, at the same time, Pakistani governments have expressed regret for the events of 1971, which I explore in this article on 71's place in Pakistan, they have suggested Bangladesh should bury their past from unanimity, not hold a deep grudge towards Pakistanis and move on. The Bangladesh ICT has also faced international criticism for its lack of transparency about flouting its rule of law and its exhibition of vengeance through its use of death penalties. In Bangladesh, however, the ICT was considered as significant by a large proportion of the electorate and its death penalties had predominantly popular support in the country. Pakistan has, however, referred to the trials and the tribunal as a politics of revenge and called for reconciliation. And yet, something that I get as an experience of working with many Pakistani students who have been in my classes or who I've come across or who have signed the book, taken it back for their uncle, there is an increasing resurgence within Pakistan itself among the younger generation in trying to seek and understand the accounts of 1971. But at the same time, the issue of irreconciliation becomes an important point to think about. And here, the notion of irreconciliation is that rather than being opposition to peace, irreconciliation allows us to interrogate the status quo by refusing to forgive endemic impunities, particularly in the aftermath of staged processes of justice and the absence presents the rule of law. So rather than thinking of reconciliation, which we have argued that is a kind of compromise is maintaining the status quo, Bangladesh's case shows and is a complex case of irreconciliation of holding onto and searching for justice itself. But at the same time that the search for holding onto the search for justice comes at a cost today, it seems. A large number of the human rights community sidelines in Bangladesh today, particularly the far reaching role of the Digital Security Act, where the smallest expression of criticism is shut down by the DSA has been compared in articles to referring to as Mosham Arte Kamandaga to kill the mosquito you could get the cannon. And various activists have also talked about fear as an environment, as they try to stop leaving a digital place, but not liking sharing or commenting on online posts about social political issues, leaders and influential people. In 2019, a similar restraint was exercised by Indians who are critical of the government's actions of revoking Section 370, Njamoen Kashmir. So in terms of thinking about the future trajectory of Bangladesh itself, Doug Moses in his account of the problem of genocide talks about how the top of genocide can function ideologically to detract from a systematic violence against civilians perpetrated by governments of all types. And in fact, in Bangladesh, the feminist movement, the human rights community are also really important in pointing out a counter nationalist framework by referring to the disappearance or the extra judicial killing of indigenous activists like Kalpana Chakma, where in the March 8th, 2013 International Women's Day, referred to the blood of war heroines run through our veins, the blood of Kalpana Chakma run through our veins. So here also the issue of 71 extends within Bangladesh itself in terms of its relationship with its indigenous communities itself. So here, and as I said, the focus on Birangona in 1971, there's a lot of focus in India which was not so there 20 years ago. But at the same time today, as various feminists in Bangladesh talk about that we need to go beyond the horrific image of the Birangona, precisely because the continuum of way in which sexual violence is understood or continuum of rape as, and these have been brought out by various feminists by Shevti Chabur, Taslima Akhtar, Naseerin Kondukar, Taslima Mirza who are identifying and showing how everyday rape in current Bangladesh today needs to draw on and show and go beyond the kind of spectatorship of or victim blaming of the survivor. We need to take lessons from what happened in 71 and apply it to current accounts of sexual violence in Bangladesh itself. Similarly, the various films made by new filmmakers, feminist filmmakers, primarily Parazana Babi's Bishkata, Lisa Gazi's Rising Silence, Arukti Shadinata and as well as various other films are kind of highlights the way in which there is an ethical encounter that feminists in Bangladesh are calling out for in thinking through the issues of genocide and the issues of Birangona. Ilora Halim Choudhury's recent work on identifying these various films that have come out recently is a case in point and I would recommend people to go and look it up. So there is actually a groundswell within the human rights community, within the feminist community today in identifying how the account of how genocide might be addressed within Bangladesh itself and where it could go within the national climate itself before it can go international. So in thinking of a future trajectory of what needs to be done about why the genocide of Bangladesh has not been addressed or why genocide of Bangladesh has not been recognized nationally as well as internationally. I think we need to turn nationally and think about while we have the point of irreconciliation that I pointed out, but also turn to the future trajectories of 1971 in terms of beyond the horrific figure of the Birangona, support jobs for Birangonas and their families, citizenship documents and rights of war babies, teach about Birangonas within school curriculum, engage with the human rights community as one of the biggest proponents of the spirit of 1971 and repeal the Digital Security Act. Also, the families with disappeared family members should also be supported so that not a descendant disappearance, but descendant dialogue can be central to the spirit of 1971 and of the history of Birangona. And here, seven-year-old Safa's photograph on 30th August, 2021 when she says, I was in the womb when my father was taken away. I think these are the issues that needs to be addressed to address why genocide of Bangladesh war is not being taken up within internationally because these elements within the national climate is also affecting the very proponents, the very supporters of genocide in 1971 are alienated today in Bangladesh. I'll stop here. Thank you very much. Nayanika, thank you very much and thank you also for taking our brief so fully and so head on. The Banguandu Sheikh Rajib Rahman annual lecture does take contentious issues head on, but it's also an academic lecture that's based in university. And it's been delivered so far by political scientists, development economists and economists. And I'm pleased to say that you're our first anthropologist. So as one anthropologist to another, I'd like to take this opportunity to ask you an anthropology question rather more than a Bangladesh question. I'm sure others will have Bangladesh question. I was very struck by the deliberate contrast between graphics of violence, graphics of sexual violence and your own use of graphics as modes of explanation and testimony. So I wonder if you could reflect more than you did in the lecture on the use of working in that medium and how it allowed you to take these really difficult and contentious issues into a broader public arena. Yes, I have been actually writing quite a lot about the graphic ethnography right now because it precisely, the graphic novel which I did not elaborate on, it's an intergenerational story of a granddaughter and a grandmother and the mother and how the intergenerational story talks about what happened in 1971 and works through the ethical testimonies of how in terms of the problems of the testimonial culture that has emerged and what kinds of ethical testimonies, ethical guidelines should be brought in place to enable that the survivors do not go through double-sab transgression. At the same time in being able to use the graphic medium, what has been significant is pointing out how the, say the role of the sex worker and when I was working with Kaya, Kaya asked me whether she should be in a veil because she's a sex worker. And I said, you know, I've never met her without the veil. That is her way of engaging with the public and that's how we are being. So this allows me to bring out the context within which I've been with survivors itself. At the same time, it also shows me like in the case of Moina, the very pole in front of our house shows the very presence, the resonance of the history of sexual violence within her everyday life on an everyday and a constant basis. So these kinds of ethnographic coins that we write about and elaborate on, bringing it into its visual realm has allowed a kind of a, kind of much more sensory way of talking about the what survivors have gone through, which sometimes maybe the written word cannot capture. So in, and also bringing various subjectivities of war heroines into the play and also showing in some of the ways why the genocidal question is not kind of not picking up traction because of all these various ways in which it's falling in the cracks itself as well. So there's been a constant engagement on my part of the human rights community around these issues as well and the testimonial cultures which you know my book is all about. So it has been a quite an interesting experience of doing it and also it has allowed me to not talk. There's a section in the graphic novel which talks about the way the idioms through which and the tropes through which survivors talk about their experiences of sexual violence. Like they would say, I was in the storm that day as you're standing around the field say, and there's a storm that has gone through without going into any kind of sensational account of what happened to her during the war. Thank you very much, that's really interesting and I'd love to follow up because I think those questions of graphic representation are really interesting, significant and there's something I think in the zeitgeist that allows those forms of representation to travel more than that they did in the past. I think you addressed the questions that are in the question and answer session pretty full on in what you actually said and the only one I'd like to draw your attention to is from Baroness Odim who invites you to get in touch with her and hope that you could go and speak at one of her all part of Parliamentary group meeting. So that's a fantastic solution. Ansar, did you want to reflect or your Excellency High Commissioner? I noticed both of your cameras are off. Ansar? Nothing from me unless the High Commissioner or our Chair, Nurul Din Ahmed wishes to comment. So I will take it, the cameras are turned off. So I will, yeah, as the cameras are off, Ansar, I'll take it. Now your camera is on, do you have a comment? I don't have comment as such yet but I want to just thank everyone, especially for you providing the able leadership and vision. I would like to also thank the, thanks Baroness, her Excellency, it's nice to see her taking part but more importantly for last three years being solid partner with the Foundation and the Institute. I think also, I think behind the scene for last five years, Sunil have been working. This was wonderful, this year to see for it have been so fantastic, we put everything together. And of course, on the part of Foundation, Ansar, as usual been wonderful supporting, being rushing back to get to London to make sure everything in place properly from Bangladesh, cutting his holiday short. So thank you Ansar. Thank you for it from Seven Mart Foundation. But of course, I am just looking at, without thanking Nyanika, we can't finish because I am looking at the number of people started at the beginning and number of people now. And this is amazing that people stayed because this high space must have been so nice that people have been glued to it, right? So thank you Nyanika for wonderful and very informative speech lecture because I thought I knew quite a lot. I have been following Bangladesh quite closely but then quite a lot, I must say I learned quite a lot from this speech today. So thank you very much. And thank you once again, Ed, Ansar and your excellency. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Gracious as always. I will pass to the High Commissioner and I would particularly encourage you High Commissioner to reflect on what Nyanika said in addition to extending thanks to everybody involved. Thank you, Professor Simpson. I am guilty of being absent for a while from the lecture. I'm so sorry, but I was there for, I think during the first half of the lecture, I did apologize to you that I had to leave for some other event, but I've come back and I just want to express my deep gratitude to Ms. Nyanika Mukherjee because what a serious work she has done on our, it goes beyond Birangana's, it goes to genocide but mostly on what happened in 1971 and I have seen some of the comments in the chat box that why is it that India and Bangladesh recognize it? Why isn't Bangladesh genocide recognized globally? That's precisely the question. I do agree with the person. If there's a bias on that question that it's only India and Bangladesh, yes, there were 10 million refugees from Bangladesh, Bengali refugees in India and organizations such as Oxfam, save the children who worked in those refugee camps know exactly what atrocities took place in Bangladesh. So whoever's asked that question for them, I want to respond that it is historically recorded in Anthony Mascarahan's book. It is there in Black Telegram. It is Senator Edward M. Kennedys. He was the chair of the Senate Humanitarian Committee at that time. There were many recorded and I know that Ms. Mukherjee has researched, I'm sure based on a research on all those historical references and documentation. So there is very explicit documentation on what happened in Bangladesh, whether it was it constituted genocide or not. And this is precisely why I want to invite Professor Naanika Mukherjee will get in touch with her, whether she'd like to speak coming 25th of March. We are organizing a genocide with the UCL and there, she mentioned some of our friends and some of them would be there speaking from New York and UK as well as we have invited a couple of members of the parliament whose very close relatives had fought in the 1971 Bangladesh-Pakistan Liberation War, either as the commander of the Indian army or things like that. So they would be there, including we've invited Lord Billy Moria. So his father was one of the commanders of the Gurkha Regiment during the Bangladesh Liberation War. And I had liberated Pilgunj but what's important is that they witnessed this. So yes, that is why Indian army who shed blood in Bangladesh with Bangladesh war of liberation heroes and with the Biranganas are witness to it but there are many international witnesses to that too. So this is beyond question that work crimes, war atrocities, rape, sexual violence, enslavement, sexual enslavement for nine months, everything happened on the soil of Bangladesh and it was committed by forces as well as civilians. And coming back to Professor Naanika Mukherjee, I want to again thank you. You said that Bangladesh is like your second home and I was there doing that part. And we're very glad to know that you're doing research with mainstream Bangladesh University such as Johan Gin Nagar University as well as other universities and other academicians and human rights activists and women activists. And I continue as from Bangladesh High Commission we'd very much like to get in touch with you and ask you to speak if possible at the British Parliament. As on 25th of March, we just came to know that we have the Bangladeshi and I know Baroness Paula Oddin is also there. So and Rishnar Ali, a Bangladesh origin parliamentarian is currently the chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Bangladesh. And I encourage all of them to take Miss Naanika Mukherjee to the British Parliament because UK was one of the countries alongside India who had supported the Bengali refugees in 1971 and also acknowledged, provided moral, economic and Bengali-British community here in the UK in 1971 did the demonstrations at the Trafalda where there were three placards. One said recognize Bangladesh. Number two was stop genocide. Number three was release Sheikh Majib Rahman. So therefore British politicians did take a stand. They were, I would also send to Professor Simpson and share with with Naanika Mukherjee. There were 223 or something parliamentarians from the UK across the party which signed a petition asking to stop genocide in Bangladesh and it is there. Mr. Sultan Sharif, he had kept a record and shared it with us just last week. So we are keeping it for the 25th March, Bengali genocide day. And we invite her to speak this. We'll write a letter to her inviting her there but also I encourage and call upon all the Bangladeshi British parliamentarians at the British parliament. Just like, you know, Nuddin Bhai is doing his job at Suez in the academic circles. Why don't they bring it to the four the British parliament, Bangladeshi, Scottish MP Mr. Faisal Chaudhry is trying to have a motion done on 25th of March at the Scottish parliament. We've encouraged our councillors at the Welsh parliament but to bring it to the British parliament would be something wonderful. There was a motion on 26th of March, 1921 on the Golden Jubilee of Independence but we hope that there will be another motion at the British parliament acknowledging the Bangladesh genocide. And we hope that Professor Naanika Mukherjee will play a very important role in that wishful thinking. Thank you. Hi Commissioner, thank you very much. Nailika, do you have anything to say in response before I close? No, I wanted to say, yes, the issue of genocide internationally is something I guess can be moved at the level of parliament but also I guess various human rights organisations within Bangladesh and outside Bangladesh also have a narrative about Bangladesh which I guess is also impeding the recognition of 71's genocide. So I think the present is very much relevant about the recognition of the past genocide. And I think this is where I had a point about the human rights community in Bangladesh and history brought in board with the Bangladesh government so that because the main proponents of 71 and the spirit of 71 are the human rights community within Bangladesh who are very alienated right now. So this is where if you look at my recording if you have not heard it it would be helpful to work through what you make of it in terms of the various dynamics within Bangladesh itself. And I would think that is one of the first places where this dialogue about genocide needs to begin because most of them throughout their life project previously they have worked towards calling out the events of 1971 has been a part and forefront of their work and they are not able to do that work anymore because of various provisions around digital security act and the disappearances in Bangladesh. I think these need to be brought into forward. Yes, but 1971 genocide has never been debated in Bangladesh but when 1970, 2019, 2010 international crimes tribunal that were trying those principle accused is when the division started. So we also need to reflect on that that who are actually on the side of 1971 whether where are those human rights organizations are they actually work, whether their activism is on the victims of 1971. That's a big question. So there's a big support. Yeah, the Sememarch Foundation or the Tribunal of the Trust here where Mr. Ansar Ahmed-Ullez they're working for that. So that narrative also needs to be taken into consideration. And I think Bangladesh is fundamental what you call it the fault line is that there are pro-1971 people and there are anti-1971 people that continues today. So that debate always sort of burdens our nation. It keeps on burdening our nation. And at this point, all I know is that Prime Minister Shikhasina she has, she gave an electoral pledge in 2001, 2008 that if she comes to office the children of the 1971 intellectual killing and the war victims they had demanded this that there was never closure on this. You need to have some sort of justice system some sort of tribunal and she did her best. It may not be the perfect one but it was an attempt to give some solace to all these victims families. And I hope that those human rights activists and the organizations that are still looking for justice from 1971 should continue to group together and work. And I don't think the government would ever be an obstacle to that. So in my last slide, I had a few lists of things which comes from the war babies, international adoptees who are another proponent of this on the survivors and we are on us who are not getting jobs and we have been in touch with the ministry as well as we've been working with them trying to not successfully. So there needs to be a way in which addressing the concerns of survivors, concerns of war babies. And as far as I know, in my as an outsider as an insider outside, as I call myself I have seen predominantly the support for 71 is on a majority front. The only, I guess the issue becomes when 71 is weaponized that is the issue when the divisions have started. So I think it's really important to think about and like the ICT, the tribunal had massive amount of support within Bangladesh itself even though it was criticized internationally where the one agrees or disagrees with it there was a massive support within Bangladesh itself. So I think there is a need to look at the concerns of these human rights community within Bangladesh and see how they can be brought on board without punitive measures and punitive laws is would be my insider outside of position and as a friend of Bangladesh and as a friend of the Bangladesh war of 71. Well, we invite you to the high commission we'll get in touch with you and I'll take on on those recommendations that you make with our war of liberation ministry. Thank you. Hi, commissioner. Thank you very much. Although we're out of time there is one question in the Q&A session that I'd really like to give Nyanika opportunities to respond to and it comes from Parul Mishama who thanks you for the enlightening event and asks what do you think the reason is for the rhetoric of being on a socially dying after a few years after 71? Does it imply that narratives of wartime and sexual violence have a short afterlife, which then has to be resurrected later? Well, the rhetoric of the Briangona has actually never died down after 71. It has continued within Bangladesh as I show in my book within state statements as well as press accounts but thereafter it falls off state articulation as well as a press and that's where you have more of a focus on the army in the post-75 and 80s period. But the figure of the Briangona has existed actually in the visual and the literary realm throughout since 1971 till now in various forms but the rhetoric has actually known but what has been missing in the case of the 1971 of the figure of the Briangona is there were certain accounts of testimonies that were recorded right after 1971 but the role of testimonies has never been forefronted till the 1990s when the oral history testimonies started itself. So there's a difference in terms of rhetoric and practice. So the representations of the Briangona has continued throughout the five decades of Bangladesh's 50 years of Bangladesh itself. So the narratives of wartime sexual violence are always used for propaganda purposes. We see in the case of World War as well as various other instances and also if we today think of the Briangona narrative only being used as a form of social control that is where the human rights narrative would not materialize and would not work in due course or the genocidal narrative would not work itself. So the narratives of wartime sexual violence are actually never silenced. They are always used for propaganda purposes because it shows the brutality and a certain construction of the adversary of the enemy itself. What is actually missing in terms of sexual violence issues are the rape of men during wartime because it kind of affects the demasculinizes the nation and affects the virility of the nation. So it becomes often easier to talk about the rape of women and the rape of men itself. And there the role of nation and masculinity are kind of intrinsically linked itself. And yeah, I would say the rhetoric never, the representations continued in some form or the other. It dropped off from state and press accounts in the late 70s and the 80s and then resurrected with Konwar Dalor in 1992. Thank you very much. I always think it's good to end an event like this by opening up a whole series of other big questions rather than closing everything down. Professor Simpson, can I intervene? Sorry, so sorry. I know you want to close it, but there is one question from one Mr. Saeeda San. I know he's a very eminent journalist, both here in Bangladesh. And he's got a question for Ms. Mukherjee. She could just lift like for one minute on that. And the question goes around like that, that Pakistan never gave an apology to Bangladesh. As you know, this is an outstanding political issue between Bangladesh and Pakistan. They recognized it in 1974, but that's about it. They never sought an apology. There were many international wars and rape cases where sexual violence against women where one nation says apologies to the others, but we never. So he had a question, something around that, that how do you think one could go about convincing the civil military establishment in Islamabad to acknowledge the genocide committed by their soldiers in the interest of the present and future generations of Pakistan? I mean, if she'd like to just give one minute response to that. Thank you. So if you... That's my question, but I thought Saeeda San who's a very eminent journalist, his question could be reflected, thank you. Yeah, absolutely. This is something that I have actually explored in the article that I mentioned in the presentation on the role of 71 or the presence of 71 in Pakistan itself. And actually I was in tracking the role of apology and remorse within the Pakistani and the Bangladeshi government. I was seeing the last few years, in fact, whether the, and maybe her excellency would be able to elaborate on this more, but in terms of my own research, it seems the narrative from Bangladesh about the quality from Pakistan has become slightly more tempered. There was a much more stronger call for apology from Pakistan earlier. And in the last two years of the interaction with the Pakistani Prime Minister, that discussion seems to have been less emphasized upon and I could cite, this is based on newspaper articles that I've come across. And I wouldn't know what goes on in the conversation in the diplomatic circles, but that might be something you might have an insight into. But there was a much more stronger focus, I think, earlier from the Bangladesh side. And as you know, various Pakistani authorities have expressed remorse. I think they have, the civil society is very much in force. We actually had a conference last year with Pakistani academics and Bangladeshi academics and a few Indian academics within it. And there is a lot of, I'm going to wait till you hear me because it's your question. Yeah, so, and there was a lot of support from among the Pakistani academics and younger generations. And there was a grand swell of that within the younger generation. How you can make the kind of older generation, I think there's a kind of a reckoning of older generations on both sides that's needed in terms of where I think the younger generation is asking both the nations to do more than is possible by the establishment of institutions right now. So I think we need to look to the younger generation for some of the answers and solutions about what is being said today in both countries and which also includes also India. Okay, I am going to bring it to a close now. So I apologize to those people who've asked questions that we've not had time to address. I think the addition of that final question was apt and appropriate. So thank you very much. High Commissioner for doing it. So to close, I would like to thank my friends and colleagues at the 7th of March Foundation for their patience with us and their willingness to partner with SOAS and the South Asia Institute. I would like to thank the people behind the scenes, Farida and Sunil. I would like to thank the High Commission and her Excellency the High Commissioner for partnering SOAS with two events this week. I'm really personally very grateful as well as on behalf of my institution for that friendship and the opportunity to work with you. I'd also like to thank the esteemed audience and distinguished guests who have attended this evening. But then finally, I would like to thank Nyanika herself for taking the time for preparing this lecture, for challenging us. And I think as the discussion has shown, raising some really important live issues. But although 1971 as my own body also knows is now 50 years ago, these issues are live and contentious. So Nyanika, thank you very much. Thank you for having me yet. It was good to come back to SOAS. Thank you Professor Simpson and everyone and Ms Bacardi. And thank you, Mr. Ansar, Mr. Nuruddin and your Excellency. Yeah, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you Nyanika, it's a nice meeting you. Yes, and let the conversations continue. Your Excellency, Ed and everyone behind this scene. And Ansar. Thank you Nuruddin Bhai, thank you Ansar Bhai. Leave now. Thank you, goodbye. Goodbye. Take care.