TIME on Zia's body

[Spring Onion]

TIME on Zia's bodyFacing a future without Zia
TIME Monday, Jun. 15, 1981

Life in all parts of beloved Bangladesh has returned to normal," Dacca's state radio announced triumphantly last week. For 48 hours Bangladesh had teetered toward civil war, following a coup attempt in the southeastern port of Chittagong in which President Ziaur Rahman, 45, was gunned down by an assault force of mutinous troops. Major General Abul Manzur, 40, who led the putsch against his longtime rival, had hoped for help from the military across the country. Instead, army units stormed the rebellious military garrison in Chittagong. While trying to flee to Burma, Manzur was captured and summarily shot by "angry soldiers," as Dacca radio explained. Government troops discovered Zia's body in a shallow grave 22 miles from the official guesthouse where he had been assassinated. During a state funeral in Dacca last Tuesday, a million Bangladeshi jostled and shoved to catch a glimpse of the cortege bearing Zia's simple wooden coffin.

The assassination of the popular leader, who had retired from the military in 1977 in order to take office as President and lead Bangladesh back to civilian rule, left a power vacuum in the poverty-stricken country that acting President Abdus Sattar, 75, a mild-mannered moderate, was not likely to fill for long.

The nation's constitution calls for elections within six months, but with Zia's majority Bangladesh Nationalist Party now bereft of a strong leader and the 29 opposition parties fragmented and fractious, the fate of civilian rule seemed to depend on who flexes the biggest muscles. For the moment at least, the military's guns were supporting the government.


Bangladesh: Power Vacuum - TIME




President Zia is assassinated

TIME Monday, Jun. 08, 1981



Ten years ago this spring, young Major Ziaur Rahman broadcast an electrifying message from a clandestine radio in the East Pakistan city of Chittagong, proclaiming a rebellion against West Pakistan that ultimately created the nation of Bangladesh.
Late last week there was another voice on the radio from Chittagong, announcing that Major General Manjur, 40, had taken over the government and abrogated the country's 1972 friendship treaty with India. The hero of a decade ago, President Ziaur Rahman, only 45, lay dead with two aides and six bodyguards in a government rest house in Chittagong. All were reportedly shot by an assassination squad, led by Manjur, in the early morning hours Saturday.
Manjur's confident proclamation of a coup seemed premature. The official Bangladesh radio in the capital of Dacca assured the country's 90 million people that the government was safely in the hands of Vice President Abdus Sattar. The government declared a state of emergency and called upon the rebels to surrender. Moreover, stressed the state radio, all international agreements remained in force.

Bangladesh's long-troubled relations with India, the country that had helped it win independence, seemed to be at the heart of the assassination. The two nations are divided by bitter issues primarily concerning the lower Ganges River, which meanders through both countries as it flows out into a vast delta. Tensions have built up over rights to the Ganges water, various solutions to the water question and territorial claims to islands formed by silt at the mouth of a boundary river. The sovereignty question is particularly volatile: there are hopes of finding oil under nearby waters. While Zia had pressed India strenuously on the diplomatic front—even sending gunboats to one of the 'disputed islands last month—he was apparently not aggressive enough for a fiercely anti-Indian element with a strong base in Chittagong. The assassins were apparently linked to these militants.

The slain Zia had been one of South Asia's most promising leaders, a man who lived modestly while others chose corruption, who searched tirelessly for solutions to his country's awesome poverty.
He was also a fatalist. Once, reflecting on his service for Pakistan in the 1965 war with India over Kashmir, he observed: "There is no scientific explanation for a man to die or live. In front of me many people died, but I got a bonus of life." He used that bonus well, but last week it ran out.Bangladesh: Death at Night - TIME

 

[Al-zakir]

A general who become the true voice of bangladeshi muslim. He not only free the bangladeshi muslims from bharat slavery but also reintroduced bangladesh to the world with islamic image. He was the true visionary and unified symbol amongst bangaldeshi muslims otherwise how can one explain his populartiy among ordinary muslim unparallel to other in mordern bangaldesh. What he hs given us in 3 and 1/2 years were more than rest of the so called leaders combined. General zia may have gone but his contribution will not be forgotten by bangladeshi muslims. we are greatfull and may allah bless him to jannatul ferdous. Ameen.

 

[Spring Onion]

A general who become the true voice of bangladeshi muslim. He not only free the bangladeshi muslims from bharat slavery but also reintroduced bangladesh to the world with islamic image. He was the true visionary and unified symbol amongst bangaldeshi muslims otherwise how can one explain his populartiy among ordinary muslim unparallel to other in mordern bangaldesh. What he hs given us in 3 and 1/2 years were more than rest of the so called leaders combined. General zia may have gone but his contribution will not be forgotten by bangladeshi muslims. we are greatfull and may allah bless him to jannatul ferdous. Ameen.

That is why he was assassinated and the following quote sums up all

Bangladesh's long-troubled relations with India, the country that had helped it win independence, seemed to be at the heart of the assassination.

 

[RobbieS]

Al Zakir, I know you to be a zealot blinded by hate for India, but Jana you seemed a sane person at least untill now. What could have motivated you to turn this article into insinuating that India engineered Zia's killing? Read the following excerpt from the very article, the excerpt you conveniently missed.

While Zia had pressed India strenuously on the diplomatic front—even sending gunboats to one of the 'disputed islands last month—he was apparently not aggressive enough for a fiercely anti-Indian element with a strong base in Chittagong. The assassins were apparently linked to these militants.

What part here do you don't understand? The article clearly states that the reason he was assassinated was because he wasn't aggressive (against India) enough for these militants who wanted him dead. So he was seen as soft against India. Will India ever want such person to be bumped off?

Digging up old articles to rake dirt on India. Jana I expected better from a senior member like you. And make a better attempt next time by at least reading and understanding the article that you post!

 

[Spring Onion]

Digging up old articles to rake dirt on India. Jana I expected better from a senior member like you. And make a better attempt next time by at least reading and understanding the article that you post!

India? it was supposed to be in Zia not India.'

If it had mentioned something in between lines about India its not my fault.

Cheers i posted it purely for BD members and its on Zia.

 

[RobbieS]

India? it was supposed to be in Zia not India.'

If it had mentioned something in between lines about India its not my fault.

Cheers i posted it purely for BD members and its on Zia.

Don't play cute. You knew what you were doing. The following is what you said.

That is why he was assassinated and the following quote sums up all

Bangladesh's long-troubled relations with India, the country that had helped it win independence, seemed to be at the heart of the assassination.

 

[Spring Onion]

Don't play cute. You knew what you were doing. The following is what you said.

That was in reply to Zakir's post.

Besides that was suplimented by a quote from TIMES which suspected India for assassination of BD Zai and not from any Pakistani paper or media.

 

[RobbieS]

That was in reply to Zakir's post.

Besides that was suplimented by a quote from TIMES which suspected India for assassination of BD Zai and not from any Pakistani paper or media.

Jana, I think you can read well. Please go and read my first post. Hang on, go and read the entire article again, especially the para whose first two sentences you bolded and the part which I put in bold in my post. Your misconceptions will be cleared. Here it is, once again.

Bangladesh's long-troubled relations with India, the country that had helped it win independence, seemed to be at the heart of the assassination. The two nations are divided by bitter issues primarily concerning the lower Ganges River, which meanders through both countries as it flows out into a vast delta. Tensions have built up over rights to the Ganges water, various solutions to the water question and territorial claims to islands formed by silt at the mouth of a boundary river. The sovereignty question is particularly volatile: there are hopes of finding oil under nearby waters. While Zia had pressed India strenuously on the diplomatic front—even sending gunboats to one of the 'disputed islands last month—he was apparently not aggressive enough for a fiercely anti-Indian element with a strong base in Chittagong. The assassins were apparently linked to these militants.


It seems that the people who killed him were fiercely anti-Indian and wanted a more hardened and aggressive stance against India. Now, who in the neighbourhood could want that? I wonder.....

 

[Al-zakir]

That is why he was assassinated and the following quote sums up all

It's open secret that Bharat and local gaddar element were behind the assassination of general zia becasue it was zia who rescued us from becoming sikkim. He also made BD part of greater ummah.

Terrorist bharat behind the down fall of islamic rooted BNP-jamat in last election with help of another gaddar dog moeen and sold out bharati paid media that constantly spread Propaganda to dilute people mind about BNP-Jamat.

Is it any wonder why bharati praise low life mujib, la-hasina and mushrik inspired awami yet hate zia, Begum Zia, BNP and jamat?

By god if we can come to state power next time around then no gaddar will be around to collaborate with mushrik.

 

[TopCat]

Zia was assassinated because he alienated Monjur (the 2nd most powerfull guy and a right hand of zia on 7th Mrch counter cue) and many freedom fighters in the army. Also a lot of people still believe Ershad knew something about it, same as Zia knew many things about Sheikh Mujibs killing. What goes around comes around, Old proverb. My 2 cents. God bless his soul.

 

[RobbieS]

It's open secret that Bharat and local gaddar element were behind the assassination of general zia becasue it was zia who rescued us from becoming sikkim. He also made BD part of greater ummah.

Terrorist bharat behind the down fall of islamic rooted BNP-jamat in last election with help of another gaddar dog moeen and sold out bharati paid media that constantly spread Propaganda to dilute people mind about BNP-Jamat.

Is it any wonder why bharati praise low life mujib, la-hasina and mushrik inspired awami yet hate zia, Begum Zia, BNP and jamat?

By god if we can come to state power next time around then no gaddar will be around to collaborate with mushrik.

Your rants are beneath any response. I always had doubts on the level of your education. Your post above just confirmed my doubts.

 

[eastwatch]

While Zia had pressed India strenuously on the diplomatic front—even sending gunboats to one of the 'disputed islands last month—he was apparently not aggressive enough for a fiercely anti-Indian element with a strong base in Chittagong. The assassins were apparently linked to these militants.

The above was said by TIME at the death of Gen. Zia. But, TIME printed it not after making a proper investigation of the killing. So, it is unwise to accept the TIME version at its face value.

General Manjur was a brilliant officer of Pakistan army, who also rebelled against Pakistan and fought to establish Bangladesh. An officer like him would not single handedly kill the President without others to conspire with him.

So, there was a conspiracy, and it was not that the conspiracy was initiated in the Chittagong Cantonement. It was conceived and planned by Gen. Ershad and some of his subordinate officers who were also very intimate with Gen. Manjur. You have to understand the following:

1) A briiliant Gen. Manjur was quite a hot-headed officer. But, he was not that naive that his temper would make him impulsive, too. He was supposed to understand that without the fall of Dhaka cantonement and death or capture of COAS Gen. Ershad, his coup attempt would fail.

2) So, he must have collaborator army officers in the Dhaka cantonement. These collaborators were double agents, working , in reality, at the order of General Ershad, the then Army Chief of Staff.

3) The collaborators assured Manjur days before that in case Gen. Manjur kills the President, they would take over Dhaka cantonement, Vice-president's house and other vital places. They would capture or kill Ershad, if needed.

4) There was no possibility that Gen. Ershad directly conspired with Manjur, because he was in very bad terms with him. Manjur had demanded for himself the post of COAS, but President Zia chose the soft-spoken Ershad, who, he thoght was a womanizer, but was not power hungry.

5) When Gen. Manjur failed to get any response from the Dhaka collaborators after the killing, he quicky understood the bluff, and then tried to run away.

6) He was caught by the police, but was forced to hand him over to an army patrol. Manjur was killed point blank when he was taken to the Chittagong cantonement.

7) People know the name of this assassin Risalder, but nobody knows of his whereabouts. Could it be that he was specifically ordered by Gen. Ershad and after the killing he himself and his family members were eliminated by the General?

Gen. Ershad was the chief architect of the killing of Zia. But, where from did Ershad get this courage or which country he thought would support him is a question that we are pondering about.

Could not be that India was behind him? Ershad was sent to Deradun sometime in 1972 for a specialized training. There Indians came to understand the mind of this soft-speaking alcoholic General, who would do any crime for power and win over a woman.

So, he might have been chosen as an would be successor to BD throne at that juncture. India was just waiting for an opportune time. Every one knows India disliked Zia because he was distancing BD from India and was getting closer to China and Pakistan. India certainly did not see these developments very kindly.

But, then people would ask why Awami League went against Ershad in the late 80s and dethroned him if he was India's choice. Well, this post is not to ponder about that question.

Sorry for the long post.

 

[Patriot]

The entire history Bangladesh millitary is full of mutines..the most recent one in 2009 by BDR (Former East Pakistan Rifles which then rebelled against Pakistan Army and now against Bangladesh army!).Bangladesh Millitary should be disbanded for good.

 

[RobbieS]

The above was said by TIME at the death of Gen. Zia. But, TIME printed it not after making a proper investigation of the killing. So, it is unwise to accept the TIME version at its face value.

General Manjur was a brilliant officer of Pakistan army, who also rebelled against Pakistan and fought to establish Bangladesh. An officer like him would not single handedly kill the President without others to conspire with him.

So, there was a conspiracy, and it was not that the conspiracy was initiated in the Chittagong Cantonement. It was conceived and planned by Gen. Ershad and some of his subordinate officers who were also very intimate with Gen. Manjur. You have to understand the following:

1) A briiliant Gen. Manjur was quite a hot-headed officer. But, he was not that naive that his temper would make him impulsive, too. He was supposed to understand that without the fall of Dhaka cantonement and death or capture of COAS Gen. Ershad, his coup attempt would fail.

2) So, he must have collaborator army officers in the Dhaka cantonement. These collaborators were double agents, working , in reality, at the order of General Ershad, the then Army Chief of Staff.

3) The collaborators assured Manjur days before that in case Gen. Manjur kills the President, they would take over Dhaka cantonement, Vice-president's house and other vital places. They would capture or kill Ershad, if needed.

4) There was no possibility that Gen. Ershad directly conspired with Manjur, because he was in very bad terms with him. Manjur had demanded for himself the post of COAS, but President Zia chose the soft-spoken Ershad, who, he thoght was a womanizer, but was not power hungry.

5) When Gen. Manjur failed to get any response from the Dhaka collaborators after the killing, he quicky understood the bluff, and then tried to run away.

6) He was caught by the police, but was forced to hand him over to an army patrol. Manjur was killed point blank when he was taken to the Chittagong cantonement.

7) People know the name of this assassin Risalder, but nobody knows of his whereabouts. Could it be that he was specifically ordered by Gen. Ershad and after the killing he himself and his family members were eliminated by the General?

Gen. Ershad was the chief architect of the killing of Zia. But, where from did Ershad got this courage or which country he thought would support him is a question that we are pondering about.

Could not be that India was behind him? Ershad was sent to Deradun sometime in 1972 for a specialized training. There Indians came to understand the mind of this soft-speaking alcoholic General, who would do any crime for power and win over a woman.

So, he might have been chosen as an would be successor to BD throne at that juncture. India was just waiting for an opportune time. Every one knows India dislike Zia because he was distancing BD from India and was getting closer to China and Pakistan. India certainly did not see these developments very kindly.

But, then people would ask why Awami League went against Ershad in the late 80s and dethroned him if he was India's choice. Well, this post is not to ponder about that question.

Sorry for the long post.

Eastwatch,yes a pretty long post indeed.

And you have yourself mentioned quite a few "whys" and "mights" in your analysis so I will desist from commenting.

I am no expert in BD affairs. I posted on this thread as I saw an article getting unnecessarily used for India bashing by people who couldn't even read the article fully and grasp what was mentioned. Hope you see my point.

 

[eastwatch]

The entire history Bangladesh millitary is full of mutines..the most recent one in 2009 by BDR (Former East Pakistan Rifles which then rebelled against Pakistan Army and now against Bangladesh army!).Bangladesh Millitary should be disbanded for good.

Patriot, please be kind towards all our armed forces. Whatever may be the squabblings, our armed forces are ready to kill and also get killed. So, considering our two bigger neighbours' appetite for more territories, water (including fish), and sea resources, we need these hot-headed fighters to repulse their advances.