The Blood Telegram Summary

999 Words4 Pages

‘The Blood Telegram’ is a description of events that led to the Indo-Pakistan war of 1971 and the formation of Bangladesh, viewed from an American perspective. The title is drawn from a dissent telegram that Archer Blood, the American consul general to Dhaka, (East Pakistan at that time), had sent to Washington. The strongly worded telegram expressed dissent by the consul general and his staff at the Dhaka consulate, for the US policy that was indifferent to the genocide being perpetrated by West Pakistan Army against East Pakistan citizens.
Following the 1970 elections in Pakistan, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his Awami League party achieved an overwhelming majority in the national assembly. However the leaders in West Pakistan, the traditional …show more content…

The US president Richard Nixon and his national security adviser Henry Kissinger were both ardent supporters of the leaders of Pakistan in general and General Yahya Khan in particular. Their continued support to the belligerent regime despite reports of targeted killings and genocide and the helplessness of India as it was drawn to war form the main thread of the book. The book shows how personal affiliations of the powerful and ulterior political motives of certain countries and its leaders can change the face of history and affect and destroy the lives of …show more content…

‘Blood Telegram’ presents a third party account of the Indo-Pakistan war of 1971 and the formation of Bangladesh. It is sourced mostly White House tapes and interviews, thus presenting a true picture of the political underpinnings of the war. However the author’s presentation of the role that India played in instigating war may go against the official version that the country purports. Though the book is titled ‘India’s secret war in East Pakistan’, the focus sometimes seems to be more on the characters and idiosyncrasies of Nixon and Kissinger. After reading the book one begins to question the political processes that vest so such power in a single person whose actions or inaction could mean the difference between life and death for millions of