Jail killings still haunt the nation

One tumultuous chapter in Bangladesh's political history unfolded in November 1975. The events of that time have remained the subject of mutual accusations and blame for decades. Even after 48 years, political parties are celebrating the day in their own way. Indeed, those times were very complicated. A crucial turning point in the nation's history came under the shadow of an assassination conspiracy allegedly orchestrated by the killers of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. In such a context, November 3 arrives as a significant juncture in the nation's life. Brigadier Khaled Mosharraf launched a coup against the Mushtaq-murderer gang. However, the attempt lacked a cohesive strategy and a clear-cut plan, which ultimately led to its failure. There was no well-defined contingency in place. Rahat Minhaz (Assistant Professor, Department of Communication and Journalism, Jagannath University) conducted an in-depth interview with writer and political historiographer Mohiuddin Ahmed about this chapter in history on behalf of Views Bangladesh.

Rahat Minhaz: How did the uprising of November 3, 1975. How was the context created?

Mohiuddin Ahmed: While discussing November 3, 1975, it is worth noting that first and foremost, the topic of black night of August 15 will come first, the day we lost the architect of Bangladesh's independence and his family members.. If August 15 had not occurred, would November 3 have transpired, or perhaps, a different uprising under different leadership might have occurred at some point. This could be a subject of separate research.

Often in history, we simplify things, but there are numerous powerful statements in history, and those in positions of power or the media establish a certain historical narrative through a particular form of statement. If we conduct extensive research, even with the preconceived framework of a certain environment or political bias, we will find that such an environment is not always present. Nevertheless, if we consider the military mindset, there has been a longstanding rivalry within the Awami League that dates back to the Liberation War in 1971. Another conflict occurred between various commanders within the army and and we see its manifestation in 1975 and the subsequent years.

The assassination that took place on August 15 was carried out by a group. But the entire army leadership approved it. Later, regarding the coup that took place on November 3, the coup plotters had cited two main reasons to explain their uprising, Firstly, they aimed to restore the chain of command within the military. They rounded up the major-captains who were exercising authority in the Bangabhaban, sending them back to the cantonment to reestablish the chain of command. Later, for political convenience or personal gain, they claimed that they had staged the events of November 3 as a reprisal for the assassination on August 15, although this explanation is not deemed credible.

Rahat Minhaz: How was this coup organized?

Mohiuddin Ahmed: The coup took place on the night of November 2. The coup was quite confusing, because the two companies guarding the Bangabhaban were all soldiers of the 46th Brigade. They were under the command of Shafayet Jamil. In other words, the loyal people of Shafayet Jamil were guarding Bangabhaban. That night they left Bangabhaban unguarded. This is the coup. The plane then took off at dawn. Many Air Force officers were unhappy that the plotters did not involve the Air Force in the August 15th August. Their perspective was that by undertaking such a significant adventure on August 15th, they had left us behind. So they also got involved in the November 3 incident.

Rahat Minhaz: What happened in the beginning of this coup? What kind of changes have come to the state structure, want to know a little more?

Mohiuddin Ahmed: When the coup took place in the early hours of November 3, the murder took place in the prison. Our four national leaders who are in jail were brutally killed. After August 15, the disorder within the army became more extreme. The chain of command completely broke down. The then army chief Zia was also interned by the November 3 coup plotters. Obtained a resignation letter from him. Second they did a trick, they started lobbying to keep Khandaker Mushtaq as President and appoint Khaled Musharraf as Army Chief. He allowed those who were part of the murderous gang of August 15 to leave the country safely. Because when there was a change, the murderers of August 15 saw that they did not want to remain in the country without power. They left. But everyone did the discussion together. President, Military Adviser to the President M.A.G. Osmani and Chief of Defense Staff Major General Khalilur Rahman together. The killers of August 15 went to Bangkok with their families that night.

Rahat Minhaz: The jail killing took place within the November 3 coup. There is no end to the mystery surrounding this assassination. They were killed in the secure area of the jail. The coup plotters claimed that they knew the incident later. What was the secret? What exactly happened inside and outside with the killing?

Mohiuddin Ahmed: According to Shafayet Jameel, on November 4, they were informed that four national leaders were killed in the jail. It seemed very surprising because on the eve of November 3, around 2:30am, they did the coup. At that time the murder was carried out. No one felt it, no one knew!

It was surprising, because no one took a tank to the prison. A few went there armed with guns, rifles, and other weapons. If the prison gate was not opened, they could not enter under any circumstances. There would have been gunfire, and the people would have awakened. Many would have rushed to the scene. So, it was not possible.

As we know the story, Khandaker Mushtaq telephoned and hearing his instructions, the jail gate was opened. Some of them went inside and killed four leaders. We have been hearing this statement for years. We do not ask, why did you open the prison gate? Did they bring tanks with them? No, they did not bring any tanks. That's one aspect of the story.

The second matter is related to the morning of the 4th. The plotters of the coup on November 3 had no knowledge that such a significant event had occurred at the jail, If there was even a single wish in their minds that they were taking revenge for the August 15.

This means that the subsequent situation following August 15th, if it involved returning to another political government, and if that was part of their plan, then they would have undoubtedly included the four national leaders in their strategy. They did not include the four leaders in their plans because they did not look for the four leaders. They were initially considering keeping Khondakar Moshtaq as the president and appointing Khaled Mosharraf as the army chief without resorting to any killings. Their intention was to first arrest Khondakar Moshtaq, along with his accomplices.

When they received the news on November 4, they claimed that these four leaders were no longer alive. What could they have done at that time to return to a political system? According to our constitution, in the absence of the president and vice-president, the speaker would act as the president. At that time, Abdul Malek Ukil was the speaker. But what did they say? When Khandakar Mushtak was unwilling to agree to any terms proposed by Khaled Mosharraf, in the end, he was compelled to resign. Chief Justice Abu Sadat Mohammad Sayem was appointed as the president, not Malek Ukil. This means that they did not approach Malek Ukil, as per the provisions of the constitution.

Second, they did another thing. Parliament was then not functional in real sense. On November 6, Khaled Mosharraf, in an ordinance signed by Sayem, dissolved this parliament. The parliament was not dissolved before this. MPs used to go to Bangabhaban for meetings. Parliament was dissolved by an ordinance, signed by Sayem on November 6. Earlier, the MPs used to go to parliament and have meetings in the morning. Regular meetings of the cabinet were held at Bangabhaban. This time, the Parliament was dissolved. They declared Sayem as the Chief Martial Law Administrator, which Khandakar Mushtaq was a part of.

Rahat Minhaz: The coup of November 3 did not involve bloodshed, much like the bloodshed on August 15. This can be seen as a non-violent attempt, even though the planners of this uprising couldn't execute a very effective plan. In other words, they didn't manage to orchestrate a violent takeover as they did on August 15. How would you evaluate this situation?

Mohiuddin Ahmed: Let me discuss your first question. Why was this coup bloodless? If we start our political legacy from 1947, we went through two military regimes before 1975, one under Ayub Khan, and another under Yahya Khan. Both coups were bloodless. So I don't think there will be bloodshed if there is a military coup or if the army takes power. On August 15, 1975, we witnessed a horrific, brutal massacre. It can be said that “Targeted against one larger family.” Three houses of Bangabandhu, his sister-in-law and nephew were attacked. On the day of August 15, they could have killed only these four leaders and 40 other leaders. Of course they could. We did not see any protest. They didn't do that.

Now, the point being made is that those who carried out the November 3 coup did not have any political goal. On August 15, there was a clear political agenda. However, on November 3, there was no such political goal; it was entirely military-led. A faction within the army was engaging in insubordination there. Their intention was to retrieve the control from that group, which was engaging in unruly behavior. This was essentially their intention. Who would they kill there? Khandaker Mushtaq had to be eliminated. They wanted to keep Khandaker Mushtaq safe.

Rahat Minhaz: Many say that this was a pro-Indian coup aimed at restoring power to the Awami League. How valid is this assessment?

Mohiuddin Ahmed: Whether this coup was in favor of India or not, but today we are discussing this issue after 40-50 years. We have to understand that people of this country were anti-India even during Pakistan period. In the 60s, love for India was not awakened through the democratic movement, only anti-Pakistan came and the liberation war against Pakistan. After the Liberation War of 1971, Pakistan is no longer on the scene. Then India came forward again. The conflict of the people here with India is due to communal division and historical reasons. It is not even supposed to be settled in three-four years.

On the other hand, the Bakshal government or the Awami government was seen as a pro-Indian government. Everyone knows it. At that time anti-AL politics and anti-India politics became one. Now there was a coup on November 3 and when it went against Zia-Moshtaq, a perception might develop in the public mind that it was a coup on the side of India, a coup on the side of the Awami League. On November 4, they brought out a procession, starting from Dhaka University and proceeding to Dhanmondi 32, carrying a portrait of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. CPB (Communist Party of Bangladesh) mainly organized the rally. At that time, the CPB(communist party of Bangladesh), the student Union, and the student League worked together under the banner of "Bakshal's National Student League." CPB did this by placing a gun on the shoulders of the Chhatra League.

When the procession arrived in front of Kalabagan, Khaled Mosharraf's brother, Rashed Mosharraf, and their mother joined the procession. As a result, people saw both sides coming together, which made it appear as a pro-Awami League rally. However, it was immediately taken as a sign that Khaled Mosharraf was working on behalf of India, and this perception was further fueled by a leaflet distributed in the army at that time. The leaflet referred to Khaled Mosharraf as India's agent, and this association with the November 3 coup significantly tarnished the rally's original purpose and objectives.

However, I do not believe that Khaled Mosharraf staged a coup on behalf of Awami League or to install Awami League in the government. If they did, they would not have allowed the Jail killings.

I am civilian. But my common sense says Khaled Mosharraf is not fit to be a commander. Khaled Musharraf, Shafayet Jameel and their allies showed their stupidity on November 3. It was not in their imagination. As my analysis, They had no idea that a political regime would emerge as a result of their coup. They didn't want it.

The murder of four national leaders in jail still haunts us. The real reason behind this can still be investigated.

Rahat Minhaz: Thank you. 

Mohiuddin Ahmed: Thank you also.