Mengal, Mahrang, and Mandela

Pondering the worsening security situation in Balochistan

0 8 6 minutes read

The federal government needs to constitute a high-powered parliamentary commission with representation from the small provinces, including stakeholders, to look into the grievances of the Baloch people

By Ambassador M. Alam Brohi

We have recently witnessed a spike in terrorist attacks in the vulnerable regions of Balochistan and KPK. The increased violence in Balochistan triggered a strong reaction from the federal and provincial governments. As a countermeasure, the provincial government initiated a heavy-handed crackdown on the Baloch Yakjehti Committee, arresting its woman leadership, including Dr. Mahrang Baloch. Politicians and tribal elders condemned this as an extreme measure showing disrespect to the Baloch women, particularly when they had no role in the deterioration of security conditions in the province. The Baloch Yakjehti Committee is engaged in political protests against disappearances. There has been no precedent of such violation of the Baloch traditions in the previous uprisings of March 1948, September 1955, and July 1973.

This has prompted certain political leaders to take action in defence of the honor and dignity of the Baloch women. Sardar Akhtar Mengal, who had earlier resigned from the National Assembly, has been holding a sit-in at Lakpass, on the outskirts of Quetta, for the past three weeks, because he was not allowed to enter the provincial capital city. The government’s coercive policy would further fuel public discontent and anger among the people of Balochistan and widen the gulf between the rulers and the ruled.

The worsening security situation in Balochistan has sparked an academic discussion about the redemption of the security situation in the province. In the aftermath of the violent attack on the Jaffar Express, the situation in Balochistan gained heightened attention within the country and abroad. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif paid a flying visit to Quetta. A huddle of the parliamentary leaders also followed it. However, the statements that followed this flurry of activities dampened the hopes of those who stand for a negotiated political settlement.

The Prime Minister talked in military terms, vowing to make Pakistan a hard state and crushing the violent uprising in the rugged province. His government considers the current violent situation in Balochistan a security issue rather than a political one. Accordingly, the only solution to this festering problem is: the Baloch insurgents should unconditionally surrender or face the kinetic wrath of the state. We need to separate the chaff from the wheat. The armed insurgency needs to be dealt with severely. However, the grievances of the Baloch populations deserve to be looked into through a political lens by a broad-based forum for an acceptable solution. The inflexible and hardened stances never bridge the distance between rulers and the disaffected population. How can a hard state help resolve an issue as old as that of Baloch grievances?

President Asif Zardari sounded more conciliatory. He promised to establish a camp office to address the Baloch grievances which, we all know, are well spread over the past seven decades and range from the resilient demands for ownership over their resources; political and economic autonomy within the meaning of the agreement signed by the leadership of Pakistan with the last Khan of Kalat, Mir Ahmed Yar Khan, and fair and just share in the federal funds and jobs. Well, all this is above the President’s capacity and mandate. The Baloch leadership would not compromise on these demands given Balochistan’s current shifting political dynamics.

While approaching the Balochistan issue, we should keep two facts in mind. First, the unrest in the province has a historic background beginning with the annexation of Balochistan into Pakistan in March-April 1948; its merger into the infamous One-Unit in September 1955; the arbitrary dismissal of the elected government of National Awami Party headed by Sardar Attaullah Mengal in July 1973, arrest and incarceration of Baloch leaders in Hyderabad, and the violent murder of Sardar Akbar Bugti in 2006. Throughout all these rebellious uprisings, the Baloch suffered untold miseries, facing disappearances, jails, and executions. Their grievances apart, they, most importantly, never abandoned their mainstream political activities within the constitution of Pakistan.

Second, talks were also held earlier with Baloch nationalists for the ultimate salvation of the situation in the province. The angry Baloch leaders, tricked into a reconciliation process in the early 1960s, laid down their weapons on the government’s guarantees for a new era of national harmony. Instead, Nawab Nauroz Khan Zehri, his sons, nephews, and close aides were arrested and jailed in Hyderabad and Sukkur. In prison, they were tried, and seven of them were executed. Nawab Nauroz Khan, over 85 years old, died of distress in the Jail.

General Zia released Baloch and Pashtun nationalists from Hyderabad Jail, and took some compensatory measures in Balochistan by his Governor, General Rahimuddin. General Musharraf constituted a parliamentary committee under Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain to look into the grievances of the Baloch. The committee’s findings were never made public. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, in his third term, mandated the nationalist administration of Dr. Abdul Malik for talks with estranged Baloch nationalists. He failed to make any headway.

There is no single leader in Pakistan who can assume the role of a peacemaker in Balochistan

The reasons for the failure of these abortive attempts to mainstream the estranged Baloch were simple. The civilian and military leaders have widely different approaches to Balochistan. The military leadership has always viewed the Baloch disaffection as a security threat rather than a political issue. There has been an ever-widening trust deficit between the federal rulers and Baloch leaders. Certain clans, such as Zehri, Jam, Jamali, and Magsi, are exceptions. They are pro-establishment and amenable to federal policies in Balochistan. Collaborators are also readily found among all tribes.

“Few men have the honour to withstand the highest bidder,” said George Washington in 1779. This paves the way for the colonial style of divide and rule. The Baloch youth has walked past that era. We are in an enlightened era of social democracy, constitutional human rights, and equality before the law. The tribal chiefs are scared of the growing public power of the middle-class young Baloch leaders, especially the Baloch women. Time cannot be turned back. The state has to act as a welfare and social democracy. Instead of becoming hard, it has to recognize the complex realities of our federation. The imbalance of economic and social development in the federating units strengthens the hands of centrifugal elements. The absence of justice and fair play, political, economic, and social equity, and the rule of law has always been the ruin of states.

The Balochistan issue needs a holistic approach to resolve: Nelson Mandela to reach out to disaffected Baloch and restore national harmony, General De Gaulle to rebuild the ship and steer it to safe shores, Lee Kuan Yew to reorganize the house, and Angela Merkel radiating fragrant affection of motherhood.

In the run-up to the initiation of talks with the estranged Baloch leaders, the federal government may like to constitute a high-powered parliamentary commission with representation from the small provinces, including stakeholders, to look into the grievances of the Baloch people. This will hammer home the seriousness of the federal authorities in salvaging the situation in Balochistan. Before the constitution of the Commission, the Baloch women leaders and other political activists may be set free, dropping all cases against them as a confidence-building measure. A parallel commission may also be appointed to look into the disappearances and the atrocities perpetrated on the Baloch people.

The commission should find out: a) the share of the people of Balochistan in federal jobs as provided in the Article 38 (g) of the Constitution; b) their representation at all levels in the national army as laid down in the Constitutional Article 39 and their appointments in open competition in the army’s industrial, commercial, financial and educational institutions; c) the due share of Balochistan in jobs and dividends of the mineral and hydrocarbon industries such as gas and oil, coal and gold, precious metal and stones exploited from the province; d) the extent of the under-representation of the coastal provinces of Balochistan and Sindh in the management of the seaports and their administrations; e) the share of Balochistan in PSDP Funds; f) under representation of students of Balochistan in scholarships for higher education abroad.

The findings of the commission may be made public for all to see. The commission’s recommendations should be implemented fairly and transparently under the supervision of a high-powered judicial committee constituted by the Chief Justice. There may be continuous political communication with the pro-Pakistan political leaders and moderate Baloch nationalists. There is surely no single leader in Pakistan who can assume the role of a peacemaker in Balochistan, undertaking the gigantic task of bringing all stakeholders under one roof. Maybe, a committee of senior politicians, including Mian Nawaz Sharif, Moulana Fazal Rehman, Sardar Akhtar Mengal, and Dr. Malik, should initiate the process.