The force was never with late president Ziaur Rahman.
DUCSU was then under BNP’s student wing Chhatra Dal (JCD) control, so was majority of the dorms of DU. JCD was overwhelmingly single largest students’ party at DU campus. At that time, when two new dorms were built at DU, they were named Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Hall and Muktijoddha Ziaur Rahman Hall.
Today, Prothom-Alo gave single column 3 inches bottom of first page treatment to Zia’s death anniversary and the news item started this way, “Ex-President, Sector commander and Z force leader Ziaur Rahman’s…”.
With these exceptional nice treatments, the very powerful journalist-intellectual-academia Force of Bangladesh, in addition to a big chunk of the general population, carry and promote a very predictable deeply rooted image of Zia.
To this half of the country,
1. Zia, an army general and military dictator is the killer of democracy in Bangladesh.
2. Zia allowed re-establish Jamaat in Bangladesh.
3. Zia killed many freedom fighter army officers including Col Taher, Khaled Mosharraf etc.
4. Zia was a ruthless in suppression of press freedom.
The force, passion behind this accusation is so intense that the supporters of Zia were gratified when Zia was generously donated the title of a freedom fighter by the same force which promoted the above mentioned allegations against Zia.
On the face of intense passionate propaganda against Zia, a mere recognition of him as a freedom fighter was enough for Zia sympathizers and silent supporters.
This phenomenon is probably one of the most vivid examples of the theory “Offence is the best defense”. Faced with relentless offence of Zia hater’s, it was impossible for zia supporters to protest, “Zia is not only a freedom fighter. He is definitely a leading general of our war of independence, but more importantly, he is the father of Bangladeshi nationalism”.
In fact, as there can not be any row over Bangabandhu being the father of our independence and the nation, there can also be no question about Zia being the father of our nationalism.
26 years after Zia’s death, Zia envisioned Bangladeshi, not Bangabandhu’s Bangali nationalism, is deeply rooted in Bangladesh. The nation has already decided their nationalistic identity. Bangabandhu was the proponent of Bangali nationalism. But even his grand son and political heir apparent, Sajib Wajed Joy identifies himself as Bangladeshi.
And the very strong force in Bangladesh which is represented in Prothom -Alo or which decided DU dorm to be named as Muktijoddha Ziaur Rahman hall, is afraid of acknowledging this very fact. They know what Zia actually is, hence their concerted effort of hiding the father of our nationalism behind only an unknown freedome fighter.
And for the same reason while half of Bangladesh know and believe above 4 accusations against Zia, most of the nation do not know/ remember the followings,
1. When Zia came to power there was nothing called democracy in Bangladesh. With 4 th amendment of the constitution, there was one party rule. Except the government party, all other parties including AL were disbanded.
Over the next four years, under Zia’s rule, multiparty democracy was re-established in Bangladesh; all the political parties like AL, CPB, Jamaat, NAP etc got back the permission to float again.
2. When Zia came to power, there was nothing called press freedome. On June 16th of 1975, all newspapers in Bangladesh were closed and 4 newspapers were brought under government ownership.
Again under Zia’s watch, all the newspapers started publishing.
3. Zia never led any coup. In fact when Col Taher launched the coup of 1975, Zia was under house arrest. It was Col Taher who kind of forced Zia into taking over (as per Col Taher’s own writings). And even on gun point Zia declined to become the chief Martial law administrator (CMLA). At that point at Zia’s insistence, the then civilian leader justice Sayem was named the CMLA and Zia along with Air Force and Navy Chief became DCMLAs.
4. Khaled Mosharraf, Col Haider, Col Huda etc were killed by Col Taher’s forces even before Zia’s reease from house arrest.
When Zia took over the helm of the country in 1975, fixed the ‘chain of command’ less army, started building Bangladesh he was only 39 years old. The day he was killed he was just 45.
The irony is that his son, at same age of 40, still claims himself young blood, play cricket seiging the whole city. While Zia earn popularity of whole Bangladesh with his relentless hard work, honesty, integrity; his son earn public hatred in the same lightning speed by resorting to all the loafer like activity and endless immature political arrogance.
More irony is that what the powerful group could not do in their 26 years of intense campaign against Zia, that is now being done by his own blood, his sons. Finally, thanks to his sons activities, Zia’s strong hold on the hearts of the silent majority in Bangladesh is loosening.
Related Post
Zia-the-freedom-fighter-visionary-leader-and-a-failed-lagacy
May 29, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Dear Zia haters,
I don’t hate Zia-haters because I know and acknowledge the Bengali proverb, “Nana Muneer Nana Maat.”
Perhaps, in my very many previous postings I did very proudly expressed myself as a believers in Islamic faith and tried to argue against the anti-islamic secular views. In Islamic faith to share some body with Allah is the greatest sin and that Allah would never forgive.
If as a beliver I were allowed to warship any Bangladeshi leader I would have certainly worshiped Shaheed Zia, the great leader, the savior of the nation. So, I can’t do worship him but I have the deepest love and respect for Zia and always have sincere prayer for the eternal peace for his departed soul.
Thanks.
May 30, 2007 at 1:34 am
Once again, you have written something that highlights a lot of what I’ve always thought but just couldn’t articulate. Keep it up! We need voices like yours to take up the less fashionable, but utterly essential areas where we need to re-think our history and the myths we are taught.
May 30, 2007 at 2:12 am
We lived in Bogra, Zia’s home town, in 1981. My father was a government engineer and every weekend he’d play card with other civil and military service officers. I think it was through one of the military officers that we learnt about Zia’s death. The BNP brand of politics is not very popular in my immediate family – my father didn’t vote in 2001 and I’m pretty sure my mother voted nouka all her life. But 30 May 1981 was definitely a sad day in our household. I was less than 5, and Zia’s funeral is my earliest political memory. I think this story is common to many Bangladeshis of my generation.
May 30, 2007 at 5:35 am
Bitterboy,
Thanks for your posting. You expressed my thoughts using excellent words!
May 30, 2007 at 9:11 am
“If i was allowed to worship, I would worship”
What kind of talk is this? Naouzubilla
The question for me is did Zia have a role in the assasination of Mujib? What do you say guys
May 30, 2007 at 10:11 am
In the context of Zia’s popularity as a statesman and as a freedom fighter, it is really important to study why and how present BNP leadership under Khaleda Zia’s regime loose the chance of making BNP a true political party that has enjoyed so much of popular support. Why the party doesn’t have any permanent policy, an organization structure, a transperant mechanism that can contribute to the positive political climate of the country. This party had so much potential, yet it looks like a Abahani-Mohamedan club, everything is running on adhoc basis.
I’ve talked to many BNP supporters but they seem to be quite unprepared to talk about this topic. But I feel it is very important for them that they study this and make a judgement on the course of action.
My 2 cents.
May 30, 2007 at 12:52 pm
na-ooze-oo-billah-was-taag-firullah is what exactly came to my mind.
I commend Rumi bhai for sharing his thoughts and encouraging us to share ours. Z Rahman was a true democrat, since by definition democracy is meant to harbour Jamatist and secularists like myself.
May 30, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Ziaur Rahman and his legacy should be debated objectively, and not with the colored lenses of love and hate. I think I have to alternatively agree and disagree with some of your points.
Zia’s brand of Bangladeshi nationalism: Yes, it had a different flavor – and certainly he gets credit for the regional identity envisioned by SAARC – but did it stand out as a polar opposite of 1971 nationalism, even if you subscribe to the opinion that Mujib was more about Bangali nationalism than Bangladeshi nationlism? Does it matter? Are we splitting hairs?
I remember the immediate feelings I had about Zia’s brand of nationalism at the time it happened. It felt divisive, like you had to give up being Bangali to become Bangladeshi. But maybe my judgement and analysis was clouded in those early days of political awareness. In the rear view mirror, Zia has emerged as a much stronger leader now, in hindsight, than I ever allowed myself to give him credit for back then.
On the other hand, let’s not get carried away by stating Zia was not involved in coups. Your referral to “the coup” of 1975 – assuming you mean Nov 7 by Col Taher – doesn’t account for the many coups of 1975, including the big one on Aug 15. I have yet to read a factual account of these coups taken as a whole. It’s unfortunate that Zia’s role in Aug 15 continues to be up for discussion. Why do you think Brig. Khaled Mosharraf moved against him? Some of the Aug 15 officers are still running loose – strap a mike on yourself, get them drunk and see if the truth will set them free. They are trapped by it forever.
As for that ill-fated military junta under Justice Sayem, there was no doubt who was calling the shots – if you recall the Air Force DCMLA Tawab was forced out in months, and yes, he actually had several guns pointed to his head. The subsequent “accidental” helicopter crash of Tawab’s next in command and successor Bashar, followed by a purge of the air force top brass, effectively decimated any threat from that quarter. And so it goes with other pockets of resistance in the newly “democratic” Bangladesh.
You have to love Gen Zia’s ability to manipulate the public perception. Of all the leaders of Bangladesh, I think he was the most complex by far. Everyone else you can pretty much figure out, Zia remains an exception to this day.
No one is infallible. Ziaur Rahman did what he thought he had to do, whether it was for the nation or to consolidate power or for whatever reason. I wish we could leave love and hate out of it, and just pass the history on to our kids, as it is, before it’s all lost.
May 31, 2007 at 1:17 am
Mr. Rafiq:
“The subsequent “accidental” helicopter crash of Tawab’s next in command and successor Bashar,” This statement is not true. Bashar died in a fixed-wing, two-seater, single engine aircraft. He pulled an acrobatic stunt and the aircraft wasn’t designed to do acrobatics. I can give you further proof, as a relative of mine (a former BD Air-force official and an aeronautics engineer) who was in the post-crash investigation team is still alive and living in Dhaka at present.
Whether Zia himself was involved in any of the coups of 1975-16 is doubtful, however, it is reported he had crushed (i.e. suppressed)between18-20 attempted coups against him. In the process many officers, jawans of BD forces were tried in court martial and purged from our army/navy/air-force at a crucial poin of our history.
May 31, 2007 at 8:31 am
A very relevant excerpt from Talukder Maniruzzaman:
“Each of the unsuccessful coups during the rule of Zia had been followed by severe reprisals resulting in the death and dismissal of suspected dissidents. As the “freedom fighters” and the leftist soldiers constituted most of those who were involved in the coup attempts, their strength in the army steadily decreased”.
May 31, 2007 at 4:42 pm
And some of these “leftist” soul still around to shape up how this interim entity operates in Bangladesh. From those two influencial newspaper editors to all the way to army chief -dig just a bit deeper there are trail marks of leftist in present day sushil suit.
May 31, 2007 at 10:28 pm
Excellent post. As a Bangladeshi Nationalist and an avid Star Wars fan, I take my hat off to you.
May God rest in peace the valiant soul of President Ziaur Rahman.
June 1, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Shuvro (10): yes, unsuccessful coup attempts against Zia were carried out by ‘leftists’. But what kind of leftists were they? Not your ordinary democratic socialists like India’s CPM, nor social democrats you see in Europe. These guys followed an extremist ideology that, if taken to its conclusion, would have resulted in Bangladesh becoming like Pol Pot’s Cambodia (described as Taleban minus Allah).
And these same ‘leftists’ tried their best to destabilise Sheikh Mujib’s democratically elected constitutional government (and yes, it was a democracy until BKSAL). Isn’t it ironic that in today’s Bangladesh, Zia is vilified for killing freedom fighters and Mujib is blamed for Rokkhi Bahini excesses, when the fact is that both Mujib and Zia faced a common enemy whose ideology has never had much public support in Bangladesh, and who if successful would have turned Bangladesh into a graveyard?
June 1, 2007 at 11:25 pm
M Amin (11),
Yes, dig a bit and many in today’s Civil Society, including the two editors you name, are yesterday’s Marxist-Leninist. But not everyone in this regime are left by any definition of the word. Everyone, including Zia, joined BKSAL except Gen Osmani and Barister Moinul Hossain. Osmani opposed because BKSAL was undemocratic, Moinul opposed because BKSAL was socialist. Leftists are not the only people who think ‘educated experts’ know better than common people.
April 8, 2009 at 6:32 pm
What a man…..a leader, lead his team from the front line…
He declared independence…sooner or later it will be established fact..
I am just waiting 2021 to come and get the real documents of the 50 years of Bangladesh
Besides I just wanna clarify, i am rather a Bangladeshi than bangali.