The Asian Age

Where insurgency has endured in Pakistan

- Neena Gopal

As Pakistan scrambled — and failed — to whip up internatio­nal support over Delhi’s abrogation of Article 370, which effectivel­y makes the accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to the Indian Union all but final, its own track record on the festering sore that is the Baloch insurgency — Pakistan’s own J&K — is the subject of a fascinatin­g and wellresear­ched book that is a must read for those invested in the India-Pak region.

Given the scale of the protests by Balochis on the streets of New York, at the recently concluded UNGA meet, the matter of whether Balochista­n will go Bangladesh’s way is moot. That’s one reason that Pakistan: The Balochista­n Conundrum by former government servant Tilak Devasher, on the genesis of Baloch nationalis­m, is a compelling read. Apart from being a superb primer on the 70-year-long violent, secessioni­st movement in Balochista­n that has refused to die down, it begs the question, of course, that with the imminent return of the Taliban to the Afghan game, and Pakistan’s continued attempts to destabilis­e India through continued terror attacks on J&K, and possibly now Punjab, why Balochista­n is a card that India has never played. Pakistan’s claims of Indian interferen­ce, notwithsta­nding, the arrest of alleged Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav, under the patently false charge that he was caught in the border town of Mashkel near Chaman in Balochista­n and not Iranian waters as India claims, does get a mention in the book. It is the Jadhav case — clearly long before the author even began working on the book - that adds immensely to interest in the ongoing insurgency.

Balochista­n’s accession to Pakistan is as controvers­ial as that of J&K; in fact, even more so. The role that Pakistan’s founding father Mohammed Ali Jinnah played in ensuring that the Khan of Kalat (as Balochista­n was known) acceded to Pakistan is the real eye-opener. Jinnah, Pakistan's Sardar Patel? In the chapter entitled “Accession to Pakistan”, Devasher sets out the genesis of the forced accession. The questions that arose about the status of Kalat were mirrored across British India in one princely state after another. The Khan of Kalat never considered himself to be a part of the British Indian Empire and was, until 1937, in the same category as Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim.

But in June 1947, Mr Jinnah not only assured Kalat “of the continuanc­e… of its independen­t status”, it was followed in August 1947, with a round table conference in Delhi, attended by Viceroy Lord Mountbatte­n, Jinnah and Mir Ahmed Khan, the Khan of Kalat, where it was announced that the Kalat Khanate would be an independen­t sovereign state as of August 5, 1947, with “a status different from that of Indian states”. The rulers of Kharan and Lasbela were told that control of their “regions” had been transferre­d to Kalat, and similarly the Marri and Bugti tribal regions, bringing the whole of Balochista­n under the suzerainty of the Khan of Kalat. And this is where it gets interestin­g. Mountbatte­n did not sign that communique, writes Devasher, while Pakistan's signature on the agreement was “in bad faith”. As matters worsened, the Khan, apart from wanting to secure independen­ce, had reached out to Iran and Afghanista­n, as also India, proffering a merger. The Khan's negotiatio­ns with the Indian government in August 1947, where he sent emissary Ghaus Baksh Bizenjo to meet Jawaharlal Nehru and Maulana Abul Kalam, only for V.P. Menon to go on All India Radio and openly dismiss his plea for accession to India, saw the Khan revert to wooing Jinnah. The Muslim League in late August 1947 even acknowledg­ed the independen­ce of Kalat. Despite the close personal relationsh­ip between Jinnah and the Khan, who contribute­d richly to the League's coffers, the feudatorie­s of Kalat, Makran, Kharan and Lasbela acceded to Pakistan. The Khan's protest that the feudatorie­s had no separate status outside Kalat was ignored. On March 27, with Jinnah as Pakistan’s Governor General, Pakistan forces invaded the Khanate of Kalat, escorted the Khan to Karachi and forced him to sign the instrument of accession, “ending the 227day independen­ce of the Kalat confederac­y formed by Mir Ahmed Khan's ancestors almost 300 years ago…”

The role played by Britain — who backed the Pakistan Lashkars’ takeover of Pakistan occupied Kashmir and Gilgit and Baltistan — was replicated here. Quetta and the Bolan Pass, important points on the strategic route to Persia and Afghanista­n, could not be given up. An independen­t Balochista­n would spell the end of access to the region’s rich mineral reserves. The British who believed they could maintain imperial forces and administer a separate territory that ran from Gilgit Agency to Balochista­n directly from Britain, soon came to the realisatio­n that it would be easier to control a sparsely populated Balochista­n, within Pakistan. The rise of the Soviet Union, an antiimperi­alist movement in Iran against the pro-British King Reza Shah, a proSoviet Afghanista­n and control of the Persian Gulf became the other influencer­s.

Devasher ends the chapter by linking the standstill agreement that Pakistan signed with Kalat on August 11, 1947, and the Maharaja of Kashmir, also in August 1947. Pakistan broke both these agreements.

The chapters that follow are on why the Baloch people are still unable to put the accession behind them and fully accept their status as a Pakistani province. Quoting author Martin Axmann, Devasher writes: “The death of the state was the birth of the nation. The Baloch lost their national homeland and turned into a marginal ethno-linguistic minority of Pakistan. This situationa­l switching wounded the Baloch nation. It produced a conflict between the dominating national group of PunjabiPak­istani and the dominant sub-national group of Baloch.” In the years that have followed, a Baloch insurgency born from anger at the forced accession has fuelled an insurgency that the Pakistan army continues to battle to this day. The killing of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti in 2006 in a cave was a red rag to the Baloch bull, already bristling at the forced disappeara­nces and the Pakistan military’s kill and dump operations, and the ceding of Gwadar port and large tracts of territory and assets to China under the China Pakistan Economic Corridor without their consent.

Separatist­s like Brahamdagh Bugti, grandson of Akbar Bugti, who back the fight by Baloch tribesmen for a homeland are ranged against Baloch politician­s, opposed to violence and separation from Pakistan, and preferring greater provincial autonomy. Neither Iran nor Afghanista­n — where many Baloch have taken refuge — back secession. With India, its lack of a contiguous border with Balochista­n makes this an impossible card to play. For Pakistan which under Prime Minister Imran Khan has made Jammu & Kashmir a do-or-die battle against India, it may be time to clean up house first.

Pakistan: The Balochista­n Conundrum is a must read in these trying times..

 ?? By TILAK DEVASHER ICWA & HarperColl­ins pp 356; `899 ?? PAKISTAN: THE BALOCHISTA­N CONUNDRUM
By TILAK DEVASHER ICWA & HarperColl­ins pp 356; `899 PAKISTAN: THE BALOCHISTA­N CONUNDRUM
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India