The Role of Media: How Pakistan’s Control and the ‘Winners’ Narrative’ Obscured the Bangladesh Genocide

The ”Winners’ Narrative” ad its impact

After the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971, Pakistan created a narrative that minimised the genocide, portraying the conflict as a justifiable counterpoint to Indian aggression and separatism. Pakistan defended its military operations as required to preserve national unity by concentrating on outside threats, therefore avoiding addressing the systematic violence against Bengalis (Jahan, 1972). State-owned media distributed this story, which suppressed any acknowledgement of the crimes, ensuring that the Pakistani people remained unaware of the extent of the massacre. With allies like the US and China reluctant to criticise Pakistan’s behaviour because of strategic interest, Cold War dynamics helped Pakistan suppress worldwide condemnation globally (Bass, 2013).

Furthermore, media coverage was strictly under control by the Pakistani government, which prohibited any news contradicting its official standpoint. Following official directions, domestic newspapers such as Dawn presented the military operations as a required reaction to an insurrection rather than highlighting the mass murders of civilians. While some reporters, such as Anthony Mascaranhas, revealed the crimes, most foreign media seemed influenced by geopolitical issues and provided subdued criticism of Pakistan’s actions (Mascarenhas, 1971). This media dominance helped Pakistan to keep up its story of victimisation and denial of accountability for the genocide.

Media manipulation in Bangladesh during the 2024 student protests against the Sheikh Hasina administration followed a similar pattern. Media, under the direction of the ruling party, suppressed coverage of the demonstrations and painted the students as aggressive agitators. This incident is referred to as the ‘July-August Massacre’ (Asadullah & Ritu, 2024). However, independent reports showed that police brutality and government repression were occurring. The July uprising claimed the lives of nearly 105 children (Dhaka Tribune, 2024). A report from the government shows that almost 708 people were killed (The Business Standard, 2024) and more than 19,200 individuals were injured (Hossain, 2024). The July-August massacre is as an example  highlighting the conflict of 1971 and demonstrates how public view might be altered by state-owned narratives, therefore disguising the truth in historical and contemporary contexts.

Consequences of the Media’s role

The shaping of the narrative around the 1971 Bangladesh Genocide has had lasting effects on how the conflict is remembered across the world. In Pakistan, the government’s control of the media during and after the war contributed to the creation of what is often referred to as the winners’ narrative. This version of events minimised the atrocities committed by the Pakistani military and portrayed the conflict as a necessary response to an Indian-backed insurgency. As a result, generations of Pakistanis grew up with a distorted understanding of the war, one in which the genocide of Bengali civilians was either denied or grossly underplayed (Kundu, 2023).

On the other hand, in Bangladesh, the genocide is deeply embedded in the nation’s identity and collective memory, symbolising both immense suffering and the triumph of independence. The atrocities are commemorated annually through events like Shaheed Dibosh (Martyrs’ Day) and Victory Day, honouring those who sacrificed their lives. For many, the genocide is a defining moment, representing resilience against oppression and the birth of the nation. This legacy is reflected in Bangladesh’s cultural narratives and its ongoing efforts aimed at ensuring justice and preserving the memory of the atrocities (D’Costa, 2011).

Undoubtedly, this divergence in accounts and the prominence of the Pakistani narrative have hindered the recognition of the Bangladesh genocide in international discourse. For years, the genocide did not receive the same level of attention or acknowledgement as other atrocities of the 20th century, such as the Holocaust or the Rwandan genocide (UAB, 2017). This absence from the global historical record has not only delayed justice but has also allowed the genocide to be relegated to a secondary position in world history.

The continued dominance of the winners’ narrative in Pakistan and the failure of international media to fully report and acknowledge the massacre have had lasting effects on the historiography of the event and its clear identification as genocide. While historians and scholars have made significant strides in documenting the genocide in recent decades, the initial media blackout and subsequent narrative manipulation have contributed to a fragmented understanding of the conflict (Boissoneault, 2016). The shaping of historical memory has had profound consequences for global awareness and, more importantly, justice for the victims. By controlling local media and influencing international memory of the events, the Pakistani government successfully avoided—or hopefully delayed—the global recognition of the genocide.