Indeed a dynamic leader with a remarkable personality!! Followed by a madman, and killed by an elaborate US scheme in conjunction with that madman.
More BS...Mujib WON the election, Yahya Khan CONDUCTED the fair election..
It was ZAB the thief who wanted power so bad...enough to not let the true
PM of Pakistan Sh. Mujibur Rehman..So do you actually want to live in the
LIE of believing ZAB was the legitimate PM??
Before you start putting words in my mouth, re-read my original post Weher did I say that ZAB should have become the prime minister? I hold Yaha Khan and Mujib alongwith ZAB responsible for'71 debacle.
The Awami League prepared a draft constitution on the basis of its six points but was rejected by Yahya Khan who, in the words of Mujib, "gambled with the very existence of Pakistan". Yahya Khan wanted to negotiate at least on two points but Mujib refused to modify his six points, because the Awami League had won elections on the basis of those six points.
At this point Yahya Khan and some other army generals decide to enlist ZAB's support in the government tussle with Mujib, and the rest is history.
hello!!!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *
So let me get the crux of your arguement..You say that since one of the worlds's superpower (USSR) attacked a neighboring country (Afghanistan)..leading to a culture of violence, Islamic radicalization, drug addiction, Afghan refugees...is somehow all Zias fault? Man, I hate to defend dictators but your points are wayy off. True he pushed Islmaization but lets not forget that all the Mujahids and Islamists were gathering in Pakistan, which served as a staging area, to go fight in Afghanistan. So basically your blaming almost all the ills associated with the Soviet invasion on Zia? He may have pushed the fundos but lets face it, at the time many Pakistanis were receptive to it, keeping in light the Afghan situation.
[/QUOTE]
you've absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Yor're neither defending his deeds nor accusing.
Zia was a religios hypocrite of the highest order. He used to recite Koran before every lie. General Zia was a short sighted person, who fought America's proxy war against the Soviet Union though totally against the national interests of Pakistan. The impact of that proxy war was disastrous on Pakistan's cultural, civil and political life. Zia also espoused sunni extremists who waged jihad virtually against every other sect. Another legacy of Afghan jihad was the infiltration of drugs and weapons into the pakistani society. Profit from drug and weapons trafficking helped finance the covert war in Afghanistan, while funneling enormous to a section of the pakistani military brass.
The News International, Karachi, Pakistan
Monday, July 02, 2001--
Rabi-us-Sani 09,1422 A.H
A walk in Zia's garden
by HK Burki
Constantly egged on by the Corps Commanders of Pindi and Lahore, Gen Zia finally struck on July 5, 1977. And a very nervous Chief of Staff had to make desperate efforts in the critical early weeks to justify the treason. He uttered frequent public assurances that he was there only to conduct free and fair elections within three months. He stayed put for 11 long years.
Many rulers have come and gone, leaving little trace behind. Even Ayub Khan, the great Field Marshal who was in power for a whole decade, has suffered the same fate. Not Zia. Thirteen years after his fiery departure, his legacy flourishes and pockets of his adherents are alive and active,
especially in the higher rungs of the Army.
Who wrecked Pakistan? If that honour were to be bestowed upon just one individual, Zia would walk away with it. Others, Yayha Khan in particular, had also inflicted grievous wounds upon the republic. Zia's contribution was comprehensive, profound, lethal. The military dictator was the most powerful ruler the country has known. And his gifts were
stunning: an unmatched peasant cunning, heaps of false humility, ruthlessness of a high order and, above all, a towering religious hypocrisy. He was a rare evil whose time had come.
Once he had accomplished the judicial murder of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the General emerged in his full Mephistophelean glory. He ditched the PNA fellows and dumped the Air Marshal whose disruptive services were no longer required. Crushing with savage ferocity the People's Party's supporters, he set out to create a civilian constituency of his own.
The maulanas were the obvious choice. Always on the lookout for a patron who would continuously supply goodies, they rallied to the military dictator in droves. So began the exploitation of religion for political purposes, and on a grand scale, generously rewarded as the maulanas were by their Amir-ul-Momineen.
The mlitary regime would have collapsed for want of foreign aid. Zia had all the luck, and was bailed out by the timely arrival of Soviet troops in Kabul. The American sponsored and financed Islamic jihad was unleashed in Afghanistan.
Nearly all the major problems threatening Pakistan today have their oots in those swashbuckling years of Afghan jihad. The heroin, the klashnikovs, the Afghan refugees, the sectarian lashkars, the all-consuming corruption, nation-wide outbreaks of violent crime; they were bequeathed by the Zia regime.
When the Movement for Restoration of Democracy's agitation started gaining momentum in Sindh, the military dictator sent in helicopter
gun-ships to assault villages. Then he sponsored and organised Altaf Husain's Mohajar Qaumi Movement to counter the Sindhis, injecting into the province an ethnic cancer which is raging there out of control.
Within about three to four years, the Junta had fractured the whole national fabric. Every institution without exception was thoroughly undermined:bureaucracy, higher judiciary, the press, education, civil administration and the Army itself. Ayub Khan had sent the troops back into barracks within a few months of the 1958 military coup. Officers exposed to conduct of civilian affairs were becoming contaminated and
indulging in corrupt practices. The General, a decent bloke, was enuinely keen on good governance.
Zia would entertain no moral constraints. The general would have nothing less than absolute power. He retained Martial Law for eight and a half years. Thousands of army officers, taking turns on martial law duties, outperformed civil bureaucracy in malpractices, high-handedness, terror, and especially in every kind of corruption. The Dictator knew all about it. He wanted to keep the officer corps happy and loyal. Besides, he, too, had his hands in the till.
Those were heady years. Billions of dollars cascaded in for the Afghan Jihad. Some three billion dollars a year came as remittances from workers. Then there was the smuggling of heroin, a real windfall. According to one intelligent estimate, the Zia regime, served by a inancial wizard called Ghulam Ishaque Khan, gobbled up or squandered about fifty billion dollars in a decade. Not a single economic project of any consequence was undertaken during those halcyon years. In the tradition of degenerate Muslims of the sub-continent, the ruling elite had one tremendous party.
The spin-doctor general in the Information Ministry would taunt sceptical journalists to go across to India and see how poor the Lalas were. Pakistanis, he would brag, were having a marvellous time. What he did not know, or perhaps want to know, was that the nation was living well beyond ist means. Ayub Khan was said to have chalked out a 20-year programme. Zia, it soon became obvious, wanted to remain the cock of the walk till the end of time. And two of the main planks he employed to stay in power now pose dire threats to the very integrity of the country.
The Afghan adventure brought billions of dollars, yes, but it also pawned horrendous and seemingly intractable problems. The two million refugees are not going anywhere. They have ruined the country's economic structure, gravely damaged its stability and given wide currency to a multitude of crimes. Then there are the Taliban, the darlings of the generals who have become an awesome burden and a sad political liability of the first order.
The all-out patronage of religious elements at the mass level served Zia's purposes to his great satisfaction. But what he has left behind are well-armed lashkars of great size contending with arms for supremacy of their respective creeds. From Sunni versus Shia street battles the area of conflict has widened; Sunnis are also killing Sunnis.
These harvests of hate are the direct consequence of Zia's religiosity. The multi-dimensional sectarian warfare has made life well nigh impossible for the citizenry. More alarming still is the government's apparent helplessness. Zia sent his mercenary legions to Afghanistan to fight Washington's proxy war against the Russians. A lucrative adventure, but totally against the national interest. Pakistan had no business to get embroiled in a clash of the Super Powers. And this is no hindsight.
In an article written in January, 1980 for "The Muslim" under the pseudonym of "Cassandra", the writer had warned against pushing the Terraki regime into the lap of the Russians. No matter what the colour of their politics, the Afghans, it was pointed out, were very proud of being Afghans. The new regime should be cltivated, therefore, and helped to stand on its own feet.
The usurper, strapped for cash, was interested in one thing only: American aid. Nothing else mattered. He welcomed Afghan refugees with open arms. He accepted with alacrity the American assignment.
The fat was in the fire.
Pakistan's military intervention helped destroy Afghanistan. Now the chicks are coming home to roost. There is the incessant pressure of tens of thousands of more refugees. Then the nexus between the Taliban and powerful Jihadi lashkars, already rampant here, is beginning
to threaten the country's integrity. Would it become another Afghanistan? Heil Zia!
ooooooops, I have no idea who this saad_sid is...and I don't knwo why my post appeared under this name... I ask the moderator to remove it...
thanx
Rajput:
But I agree with you, Yahya Khan did his utmost to resolve the crisis, but he seemed to be powerless against some hawks of the army.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by shawaiz: *
Before you start putting words in my mouth, re-read my original post Weher did I say that ZAB should have become the prime minister? I hold Yaha Khan and Mujib alongwith ZAB responsible for'71 debacle.
The Awami League prepared a draft constitution on the basis of its six points but was rejected by Yahya Khan who, in the words of Mujib, "gambled with the very existence of Pakistan". Yahya Khan wanted to negotiate at least on two points but Mujib refused to modify his six points, because the Awami League had won elections on the basis of those six points.
At this point Yahya Khan and some other army generals decide to enlist ZAB's support in the government tussle with Mujib, and the rest is history.
[/QUOTE]
Shawaiz, Yahya Kan did not "elinst" ZAB's support. Y. Khan could care less, I mean he knew he was going to be out of the job. So that left Mujib and ZAB, the two DEMOCRATS with vested interest in the matter and it was ZAB going to great lengths to ensure his survival and become the head of Pakistan.
I never said you had stated that ZAB should have been PM but instead I wanted to illuminate, how this so called GREAT Democratic leader resorted to subversive and anti democratic means. Sure Yahya Khan was a willing accessory but not the mastermind.
**
you've absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Yor're neither defending his deeds nor accusing.
**
Yara, human beings are complex creatures their actions are not always political or personal, mostly their a mix. If you do not understand what I mean please ask so I will clarify.
**
Zia was a religios hypocrite of the highest order. He used to recite Koran before every lie. General Zia was a short sighted person, who fought America's proxy war against the Soviet Union though totally against the national interests of Pakistan. The impact of that proxy war was disastrous on Pakistan's cultural, civil and political life. Zia also espoused sunni extremists who waged jihad virtually against every other sect. Another legacy of Afghan jihad was the infiltration of drugs and weapons into the pakistani society. Profit from drug and weapons trafficking helped finance the covert war in Afghanistan, while funneling enormous to a section of the pakistani military brass.
**
Hey I am not defending Zia here. As much as I dislike ZAB, Zia was a major scumbag for mudering ZAB like he did. I just wanted to ask: When Afghanistan was attacked what should Pakistan have done instead? I mean say you were the PM, President, Dictator, what could you do? I highly doubt that you stay at the sidelines when a neighbor was attacked by an imperial power, not forget the allegations that the Soviets also intended to challenge the Pakistan State next. As for the extremists, they were gathering in Pakistan/Afhghanistan border areas to ffight the Kafir Soviets, would you turn your back on them and send Pakistani military into Afghanistan, instead?
I agree he was a religious hypocrite and I do not like him. But also, I am fair person, he controlled many things but the Soviet attack on Afghanistan was not one of them.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by shawaiz: *
Rajput:
But I agree with you, Yahya Khan did his utmost to resolve the crisis, but he seemed to be powerless against some hawks of the army.
[/QUOTE]
Yara, this discussion has moved beyond politicians to ZAB so don't think that everything I am saying is personally directed to you. Those "some" hawks were and later became ZAB's lapdogs. In this case, it was ZAB who manipulated W. PAkistan.
RajputFury
As u mentioned u dislike Bhutto so everything I will say about his qualities wont appeal to u.. but as ur singlehandedly criticizing him and think as he was solely responsible for decca debacle I have to say some thing again..
There was absolutely no chance that East and West Pakistan could remain as one after decades of hate measures by West wing and finally army action did the final blow. After March 25, 1971 what barbarity was not displayed by Muslims against 'other' Muslims! In some respects we Pakistani Muslims left the 1947 genocide in the shade. And Bhutto had nothing to do with that army action. After Mujeeb amalgated his 6 points in his election slogans and in fact demanded that new constitution be formed according to those points there was no other option left and painful separation was inevitable. For these conditions only politicians from West paksitan after 1947 and army rule can be blamed. Starting from forcing Urdu as national language on Bengalis there was always disaster in relationships.
Giving Mujeeb power with 6 points in constitution meant automatic break up Paksitan with a lot of bloodshed as entirely the whole army was against Mujeeb as Mujeeb would had surely hanged all generals for their role in army action in east Pakistan resulting in civil war and again return of Marshal Law.
As I wrote above Majority of Pakistanis had become so exasperated that they wanted to sever links with their Western Wing brethren and justifiably so. Governing class in West had always cheated East Pakistanis. In economics the deception was breath taking. Foreign exchange from jute exports was spent on West Pakistan's industrial development. And when East Pakistanis woke up , the C-in-C of Pakistan Army ordered a punitive military crackdown. Infact Begalis were never in fvor of kashmir struggle as they thought it was some thing foreign to them and amount of money spent on army was a waste.
And Pakistani people loved Bhutto and still do to date since he picked up pieces and made Pakisytan once again a respectable nation in the world. Formed an Islamic group and never came under influence of any super power. Started a dynamic nuclear program under so many pressures. If ur assertions are true and Bhutto is such a villian why peopel of Pakistan sided with such a villian in all these years and even in his death successive PPP governments won on his name alone. Truth is hes the most mesmerising leader Pakistan ever got.. he wa the first to gave people of Pakistan true politics.. and even his worst political opponents admire his political skills and his intellegence.
**
RajputFury
As u mentioned u dislike Bhutto so everything I will say about his qualities wont appeal to u.. but as ur singlehandedly criticizing him and think as he was solely responsible for decca debacle I have to say some thing again..**
Degas: I don't hide behind my words. I dislike ZAB for what he did to Pakistan. Like I mentioned earlier I do not think that he should have been murdered by Zia.
**
There was absolutely no chance that East and West Pakistan could remain as one after decades of hate measures by West wing and finally army action did the final blow. After March 25, 1971 what barbarity was not displayed by Muslims against 'other' Muslims! In some respects we Pakistani Muslims left the 1947 genocide in the shade. And Bhutto had nothing to do with that army action. After Mujeeb amalgated his 6 points in his election slogans and in fact demanded that new constitution be formed according to those points there was no other option left and painful separation was inevitable. For these conditions only politicians from West paksitan after 1947 and army rule can be blamed. Starting from forcing Urdu as national language on Bengalis there was always disaster in relationships.**
I can agree to with what you said to a point. ZAB, the Army, W and E Pakistanis all knew the Awami 6 points platform...no one was an idiot. Now if the army had wanted to (like many of you Democrats claim) could rig the elections. Y. Khan gave one man-one vote and none of that parity BS in the election. The intentions of Y. Khan were to step down from the office, so that left Bhutto who had everything to gain. He won Sindh and Punjab, which amounted to becoming the opposition. As for the military operation the most brutal phase was conduct by that scumbag Bhutto lapdog Tikka Khan called "Operation Searchlight." ZAB had not only manipulated Y. Khan but also made sure that he had a group of officers that would support him. Need proof?
**
Giving Mujeeb power with 6 points in constitution meant automatic break up Paksitan with a lot of bloodshed as entirely the whole army was against Mujeeb as Mujeeb would had surely hanged all generals for their role in army action in east Pakistan resulting in civil war and again return of Marshal Law.
**
But come now Degas you and the other GREAT democrats call for free and democratic elections? Isn't that what you want a military government to do? Not interfere. Oh I am sorry if the results don't go your way and your ZAB's sad performance virtaully shuts him from the Prime Ministership..unless one wing could be broken. So all you Democrats are democracy loving when it serves your interests,
**
As I wrote above Majority of Pakistanis had become so exasperated that they wanted to sever links with their Western Wing brethren and justifiably so. Governing class in West had always cheated East Pakistanis. In economics the deception was breath taking. Foreign exchange from jute exports was spent on West Pakistan's industrial development. And when East Pakistanis woke up , the C-in-C of Pakistan Army ordered a punitive military crackdown. Infact Begalis were never in fvor of kashmir struggle as they thought it was some thing foreign to them and amount of money spent on army was a waste.
**
Fine, but they WON the elections, rather the Awami League won. Don't tell me that Pakistanis would never have accepted a Bengali PM, we have had already a few Bengali heads of state. Don't tell me that the 6 points did not have a sympathetic ear in NWFP & Baluchistan. Look, beyond Sindh and Punjab your ZAB had NO mandate...rather than accepting reality he manipulated to change it. All the Bengalis knew was that in the elections they had won and Mujib would be Pakistan's PM, now the manipulations of ZAB tried to block that, even you know they were FULLY justified in revolting. You cannot expect to talk about democracy while Musharraf is in power but forget it when Mujeeb had won in the fairest elections of Pakistan.
**
And Pakistani people loved Bhutto and still do to date since he picked up pieces and made Pakisytan once again a respectable nation in the world. Formed an Islamic group and never came under influence of any super power. Started a dynamic nuclear program under so many pressures. If ur assertions are true and Bhutto is such a villian why peopel of Pakistan sided with such a villian in all these years and even in his death successive PPP governments won on his name alone. Truth is hes the most mesmerising leader Pakistan ever got.. he wa the first to gave people of Pakistan true politics.. and even his worst political opponents admire his political skills and his intellegence. **
Yes indeed he made fools out of Punjabis and played up the Sindhi nationalism. Thank G-d, NWFP and baluchistan would not fall for his lies. His economic policies screwed up Pakistan, his federal secruity force brutalized civilians and lets not forget how he crushed Baluchistan. The hard drinking barely Pakistani ZAB did pander to Islamists...declared Ahmadis non-Muslim, talked about a hollow unity...one word hypocrite.
Sure I'll give him credit for the Nuclear program, and he was definately a genius..an evil genius. If you call him the most mesmerizing leader that Pakistan ever got then am I to assume that Quaid e Azam was lower than ZAB? You and many others unfortunately have been brainwashed to the point that you would worship ZAB. One thing I can assure you is that many, many people in different quarters are working to make sure that the Bhutto family never comes to power again, and Inshallah we will suceed.
RajputFury:
There is a big controversy over the number of casualties of the then east Pakistanis. Most of the Bengalis claim 3 million were killed, which seem to be greatly exaggerated. Do you've some informations, how many Bengalis were being killed?
^ Official Bangladeshi stats say something around a quarter of a million dead.
But, I'd like to make an observation about this ZAB thread, regardless of what manipulation he may have done, the fault of the whole East Pakistan debacle lays squarely on the Martial law Government, Legally and morally they ordered the crackdown. The people who signed the orders or pulled the triggers take the blame. ZAB was both brilliant and power mad. He achieved a lot and destroyed pretty much as much. To his credit he gave Pakistan a constiution, a weapons programme and did to some extent heighten awareness of the people to the wrong doings of Feudals. He also redistributed a certain level of wealth in the country. His insecurity and brutality not withstanding, he would have probably won another two elections. For the better or for the worse is the only question? I figure if he had l;ived for another 6 or 7 years the myth of the PPP and ZAB would have vanished.
**
^ Official Bangladeshi stats say something around a quarter of a million dead.
**
Salaam Zakk:
Thanks for the figures.
**
But, I'd like to make an observation about this ZAB thread, regardless of what manipulation he may have done, the fault of the whole East Pakistan debacle lays squarely on the Martial law Government, Legally and morally they ordered the crackdown. The people who signed the orders or pulled the triggers take the blame.
**
I agree but the situation became uncontrollable when ZAB deprived them of their rights in the sense that he blocked the Awamis to claim their majority. It was a political failure before a military one. It is also interesting that Tikka Khan was left out of HCR, despite ordering mant atrocities.
**
ZAB was both brilliant and power mad. He achieved a lot and destroyed pretty much as much. To his credit he gave Pakistan a constiution, a weapons programme and did to some extent heighten awareness of the people to the wrong doings of Feudals. He also redistributed a certain level of wealth in the country. His insecurity and brutality not withstanding, he would have probably won another two elections. For the better or for the worse is the only question? I figure if he had l;ived for another 6 or 7 years the myth of the PPP and ZAB would have vanished. **
Well said. I agree that he played the populist card very well.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zakk: *
^ Official Bangladeshi stats say something around a quarter of a million dead.
But, I'd like to make an observation about this ZAB thread, regardless of what manipulation he may have done, the fault of the whole East Pakistan debacle lays squarely on the Martial law Government, Legally and morally they ordered the crackdown. The people who signed the orders or pulled the triggers take the blame.
[/QUOTE]
It's also my stance on this issue. First the generals messed up verything in the east Pakistan and when things got out of their control they, as a last resort, tried to enlist ZAB's support against Mujib. Until then ZAB had actually no considerable role to play except as the leader of opposition. The Awami League won the elections overwhelmingly and secured enough seats to form the government. It was their democratic right to form the government and if Yahya Khan had asked Mujib to form the government without any hesitation and pre-requisites, the disintegration of Pakistan might have been avoided. But the intrigue and conspiracy is an age-old hallmark of the army generals and they haven't unlearned it yet. The recent political situation of pakistan is not much different. The politcal leaders of three small provinces are vehemently opposing the project of KBD and the general still insists to build it.
If ZAB hadn't been unduly incited and supported by some generals, he wouldn't have had any other possibility but to accept Mujib as the Prime Minister.
Here is an excerpt from Mazari's book "A journey to disillusionment", which merely strengthens my point.
"In the months that followed, a number of the generals such as Perrzada, Hamid and umar began following their own secret private agendas with their own chosen set of political leaders. In the disastrous aftermath that led to the end of the military regime, many questions were left without complete answers. Who among the army junta were responsible for the tragic consequences that left a shattered country? The safest and possibly the most accurate answer can only be: all of them. Faced with an explosive political situation in East Pakistan , through their gross ineptitude, their ambitious political scheming and their inherent intellectual mediocrity, they proved incapable of dealing with the crisis".