Isn't it offensive to call the Pakistan-Bangladesh war as the Indo-Pak war in history books?

Well factualy the whole conflict is and should be known as Indo -pak war, this whole 13 day conflict happened not only in east pakistan, east pakistan or bangladesh was one of the two theatres of war. Major battles were held in western theatre ex. battle of longewala. Major naval engagements also took place in western theatre namely Op. Trident Op. Python, sinking of INS Khukri etc . Battles in western theatre were more evenly matched in comparison to its eastern counterparts where combined Indo Bangla forces advanced rapidly with total Indian air supremacy. A/c to pakistan's theory, defence of east pakistan lied in west pakistan, pakistan tried to capture parts of india in west so that later on it could use it as bargaining chip at negotiating table. Gen yahya khan never thought about protecting east pakistan if india attacks it. I mean how can u protect ur country with 97000 troops, 1 fighter squadan nd low range navy against full scale Indian invasion with an aircraft carrier in its rank. India had no bangladeshi help on its western border. This is why overall conflict is known as indo pak war. But then again i would be wrong if i underplay bangladesh's role in conflict. A/c to various official sources, this is the defination of whole 1971 conflict BANGLADESH LIBRATION WAR - 26th march 1971 to 16th december 1971 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Liberation_War 1971 INDO PAK WAR - 3rd december 1971 to 16th december 1971 http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1971 Bangladesh's war started with tikka khan's commencement of operation searchlight in bangladesh nd ended with Indo pak war . To summsrise Indo pak war was last phase of Bangladesh libration war.

VERY OBVIOUS REASON : Because Bangladesh was then known as "East Pakistan" not Bangladesh - the name was formed after the end of the War. Hence, it is known as the 1971 Indo-Pak War as Bangladesh was technically a part of Pakistan till the war ended and the treaties were signed. Also, the war primarily was fought between Indian Armed Forces/Mukti troops and Pakistani Armed Forces/Razakar troops. TO NOTE: It is also known as such since Pakistan which technically included Bangladesh as a part of it at that point - pre-emptively attacked and declared war on India. The resulting end saw India beat Pakistan and force them to sign a treaty of surrender which also granted Indepedence to Bangladesh. I don't know why it made such a big issue. Everyone involved has gotten their due recognition even the US president Nixon or do you believe it's a shame to be helped by others when you're in trouble?

I'd rather ponder over whether the labels are that important, over the events that transpired. In my observation, when it comes to war history, every country which is a party to it suffers from a 'Rashomon effect'. They want to portray themselves as the parties with the biggest and more heroic role to play in the war. Take the history of the World War 2 for instance - ask an American and he'd overrate the Normandy invasions to brag about how they 'freed the *world* from the Nazis', while the Russians feel that their offensive against the Nazis was the cinched. Hear it from the German perspective and it'd be about how hordes of Russian invaders raped their women (a similar opinion held by Italians about American). In India, what passes for history in schools can be summed up as, "We were a glorious land. Then come the Muslims. They burn our cities, rape our women and steal all our jewels. Then come the British. They capture our lands, subjugate us and steal all our jewels." When reality is far more complex. Focus less on the labels associated with wars, try to hear the stories from all the sides, sideline the propaganda and try to draw a more neutral perspective about history.

Technically there are two parts to the story. It needs to be narrated correctly. A Civil War - (March 7th 1971- Dec 3rd 1971) when Bengalis of East Pakistan rebelled and the Pakistan Army perpetrated a genocide in retaliation. This can technically only be called a rebellion and not war since war is fought between nations and Bangladesh did not exist, it was the East Pakistan province. The Ind0-Pak war of 1971 - (3rd Dec 1971 - 16th Dec 1971) when the Indian Army intervened on the side of the Bengali rebels and vanquished the Pakistan Army in 13 days.  A state of war was declared and fought between India and Pakistan and the outcome was a new nation called Bangladesh

I find it offensive - since the reason the war started was so that Bangladesh can separate away from Pakistan after two years of cold feelings. The name and the way this part of history is taught makes Bangladesh's role insignificant