The Peace Question in Balochistan

SAFHR Paper 16 

Peace Audit Report 3

Shahid Fiaz

June 2003

South Asia Forum for Human Rights

Kathmandu, Nepal

3/23 Shree Durbar Tole, Patan Dhoka, Lalitpur G.P.O. Box: 12855

Tel: +977-1-5541026 Fax: +977-1-5527852

Email: south@safhr.org Website: www.safhr.org

This publication acknowledges the support of Friedrich-Naumann Stiftung, South Asia Regional Office, New Delhi. It is brought out as part of the course material for the Fourth South Asian Peace Studies Orientation Course.

Contents

Foreword

Preface

Section one: History

Section two: Issues

Section three: Resolutions

SAFHR Paper Series

Foreword

I

This is the report of the third peace audit exercise conducted by SAFHR. In the last four years we have tried to “audit” or “evaluate” the efficacy of state sponsored official peace processes in four situations of armed conflicts between the states and sections of their own citizens in South Asia, viz., the Naga National Movement in India’s Northeast, the Indigenous Peoples Struggle for Self-determination in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh, the Tamil Nationalist Movement in Sri Lanka and the Baloch National movement in Pakistan. It is fashionable to call them “ethnic” or “ethnonationalist” movements. It is important to note that none of these peoples, the Nagas, the Jumma people of Chittagong Hill Tracts, the Tamils of Sri Lanka and the Balochs of Pakistan see themselves as “ethnic” communities. Nor do they define themselves as a “minority”. Each of them claims to be a “nation” and they want their own states.

Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka as postcolonial nation states inherited territories, which are homes of many nationalities and ethnic communities. Religious, caste and ethnic identities were already highly politicised in this region during the colonial period. The anti-colonial movement in the thirties and forties witnessed the emergence of competing nationalist/religious/ethnic interests. Also, the period witnessed the failure of attempts to resolve the differences between these competing interests.

The elite of each competing group began to see itself as a “nation”, aspiring to form a sovereign nation state by driving out the foreign ruler. These competing “nationalists movements” during the colonial period worked at two levels – one, to wage a freedom struggle against the foreign ruler, and two, to build a cohesive “national identity”. After attaining independence all the states of the region got engaged in the task of “nation building”.

In the context of existing international law, these movements may be seen as internal problems of relatively new states, that is, the postcolonial nation states - caused essentially by the shortcomings of their nation building process. In a broader political context these struggles also represent a challenge to the postcolonial state formation process in South Asia. While the South Asian states call them secessionist movements, the protagonists of these struggles claim that they are engaged in “national self-determination movements”. These protracted struggles, over the years have produced fairly well defined identities of “nations”. There is evidence that the supporters of these “national self-determination” movements have come to believe that their claims to nationhood is as legitimate as that of the nation state, which is currently exercising sovereignty over them.

The claim of the states that these struggles are secessionist and therefore illegal, may be legally valid. Yet, illegal as these struggles may be, the very nature of these struggles and the manner in which the states have dealt with them as well as the current international order which upholds the system of nation states, raise basic questions about the very foundations of the theory of nation states and the doctrine of the rights of citizens. It also raises questions about the relationship between law and justice. Can law do justice?

II

“Nation” is both a historical as well as a political concept. The historic notion of nation is a softer identity as compared to the political nation. The historic nation is an evolutionary concept. It is composed of tradition, culture, customs, language, religion and territory. The “territory” in the context of a historically evolved nation is both physical and metaphysical. The historic nation can and does survive as an extra territorial entity as it can carry the memory of a “terrain” as its original home, the cradle of its culture and valour. The “political nation”, unlike the historic nation, is a hard or inflexible concept as it cannot survive without its territory. A political nation for all practical purposes is synonymous to state. It represents power – power over people and territory.

History shows us, the “state” predates “nation”. It was the long struggle of the “subjects” of the “empires” that led to the break up of the “territorial states” and the creation of “nation states”. In the nation states the power to rule was transferred from the divine ordained ruler to the people, who asserted their right to rule themselves by declaring themselves free. These  “free people” staked claims over chunks of territories and formed “nation states”. However, once the compact to form a nation state was sealed, the “free people” became “citizens” and “freedom” got converted into “rights”. And, through the instrument of “law”, the states began to administer, regulate and protect the “rights” of citizens.

In the world of nation states only citizens have rights. She who is not a citizen has no rights. This is the irony of law perpetrated by the fiction of a “compact” between the free members of a nation who came together to form a nation state. What is even more ironic is that this mythical compact cannot be undone. The “membership” or citizenship of a state is involuntary. In a world divided into states, and defined by national and international legal systems every individual has to belong to a state. But the states have the power to reject people, deny or withdraw citizenship, expel them from their territory – all these are “legal” actions in the exercise of the sovereign powers vested in the state. Even the “stateless” must seek the “protection” of one state or another for their survival.

III

The audit exercises reveal that while the genesis of these movements might be traced back to the colonial history of the region, the failure of the postcolonial states to recognise the multi-national and multi-ethnic characteristics of their citizenry and to develop a polity that treat different sections of people in a just and fair manner is mainly responsible for the emergence of these struggles. These audit exercises have also shown us that these struggles are mainly victims’ response to the process of marginalisation and discrimination practiced by the majoritarian polities of the South Asia. Even today the protagonists of these struggles continue to present their “case” in the language of “rights”, which would indicate an acceptance of the state as the guarantor of rights of citizens. It is the failure of the states to deliver justice and the constant invocation of the constitution and other laws to justify this denial of justice, which has brought about a transformation in the character of these movements. Law has lost its legitimacy and the constitution seen as an obstacle to the fulfilment of their aspirations.

Though the states have dealt with these struggles essentially through military measures, in their enlightened moments the South Asian states accept that these struggles are caused by the flaws in their “nation building” processes. As a result their responses have oscillated between military oppression to offers of dialogues with the insurgents. As ruthless suppression of these struggles is a common practice in this region, similarly “peace agreements” between the states and the once “outlawed” secessionists have also become a regular feature of statecraft. On their part, faced with the massive repressive power of the states and a hostile international order, which is loath to recognise new nation states, the insurgents have also accepted these “agreements”, which offer a range of political concessions in the forms of “regional autonomy”. 

It will be fallacious to argue that regional autonomy can work as a panacea in this context. The received wisdom says that federalism albeit with some innovations is capable of providing solutions to most of these problems. However, the recent history of South Asian polities and the prevailing international political order raises doubts about whether regional autonomy and federalism can work in this region unless the majoritarian character of these polities are fundamentally transformed. South Asian states, like all states are votaries of the doctrine of national sovereignty. Their failure to provide economic, social and political justice to their own people and their inability to develop and strengthen the institutions of democracy has made them extra conscious about “national security”. In fact it would not be an exaggeration to call them national security states. In the era of the so-called “global war” against “terrorism” and unilateral military intervention by United States and its allies, the South Asian states are learning to redefine their claim to sovereignty by aligning with the United Sates. The current international situation has put the doctrine of rights in general and international human rights law under enormous pressure particularly as human rights are being violated in the name of promoting human rights. It is moot question whether the states can protect the rights of their own citizens.

What is needed is a shift in the paradigm of the nation state. We need to begin re-examining the premises of the theory of nation state, which have created majoritarian political structures. Moreover, under pressure of economic globalisation and the free market regime, economic hardship has increased. The states have drastically reduced their social spending. As a result the minimal social safety net that was available to the poor in these countries has virtually vanished. Ironically, public anger today is directed against the liberal humanist secular political parties that promoted the policies of social security. More and more people are joining the ranks of the New Right, which is mainly responsible for the economic policies that have increased the hardship of the common people. The audit exercises show that the pressure on the victims of marginalisation has increased enormously.

The ongoing peace dialogues, be it between the Indian state and the Naga nationalists, the Sri Lankan Government and the Tamil nationalists or concerning the political process in Pakistan to solve the Baloch national question, are all trapped in the intractable situation of “finding a solution within the legal system of states”. It is clear that the agreements that would be reached within these parameters will not address the issue of justice. And as the “agreement” between the Jumma people of the Chittagong hill tracts and Bangladesh shows, even these limited agreements cannot be implemented. The reports bring out, that our attempts to extricate human rights and peace politics from the closed circle have to be perched on the principle of justice that does not limit itself to constitutional confines laid down by the nation-state system in this region. 

Tapan K. Bose

June 2003

Preface

This is a report of an audit exercise of the peace process in Balochistan. To understand the nationalist aspirations of the people of Balochistan and the process of peace making between the Baloch nationalists and the government of Pakistan one needs to take into account what the Baloch people see as their “uniqueness”. Baloch nationalists have always claimed that their social practices, culture, language and traditions are quite different from those of the peoples of other parts of South Asia. Historically, the people of Balochistan see themselves more as a part of Central and West Asia than as a part of South Asia. The process of reducing the Baloch people into a minority in their traditional himeland, which began under British colonialism was completed in the era of post colonial state formation. The vivisection of Baloch territory into three different parts began earlier when parts of the Baloch homeland was taken over by Iran, Afghanistan and the British colonial rulers. Subsequent acts of aggression and incursions continued against the Baloch people in all these three parts.

The part of the Baloch homeland, which was not annexed by Afghanistan and Iran was further divided into British Balochistan and so-called “independent” or “semi-independent” states ruled by Nawabs and tribal Sardars under British suzerainty. Like the subjects of most of the 500 plus “princely states” within the British Indian Empire, the Baloch people also did not become a part of the anti-colonial nationalist movement of the subcontinent.

Likewise, the leadership of the nationalist movement of the suncontinent, particularly the Indian national Congress and the Muslim League also made little attempts to integrate the Baloch people’s concerns and aspirations into their agenda.

However, it all changed after the partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947, when the newborn state of Pakistan claimed its sovereign control over the territory of British Balochistan and Kalat, Makran and Lasbela – the three “independent” states of the Baloch people. Therefore, the Baloch question within the federal structure of Pakistan holds some unique features vis-à-vis the struggles of other ethno-national groups striving for political, economic and cultural rights. In this report, we will deal only with the Baloch issue in Pakistan and do not intend to cover in our discussions the situation of Baloch people living in Iran and Afghanistan.

Pakistan is a multi-cultural, multi-linguistic and multi-ethnic society. The peoples of Pakistan also have strong national identities, which have evolved over centuries. As a matter of fact it is a “multi-national” state. Unfortunately, the ruling elite of Pakistan in their attempt to create a singular or a unitary national identity, failed to pay due regard to this aspect of Pakistan society. This resulted in the break up of Pakistan in 1971, after about twentyfour years of its creation. The independence of Bangladesh (former East Pakistan), however, did not change the political mind-set of the rulers of Pakistan. A third military campaign against the radical nationalist movement of Balochistan was started in 1973 that continued for five years.

Though, Pakistan’s military ruler the late General Zia-ul Haq halted the military action against the Baloch in 1977 and declared general amnesty for Baloch nationalists, interferance in the affairs of Balochistan did not stop. Also, no attempt was made to heal the deep wound caused by the atrocities inflicted on the Baloch people during the military action. The demand for investigation into the killing of hundreds of innocent civilians, wanton destruction of their properties, disappearances of hundreds of Baloch people and collective punishment imposed on poor communities were ignored.

In the last two decades, we have witnessed the changing priorities of provincial political parties of Sind and N.W.F.P. in relation to the attitude and policy of the ruling establishment of Pakistan. Pashtoons, now enjoy a relatively greater position in the power structure of Pakistan, while the centrifugal forces of Sind have been sidelined by the centrist politics of Pakistan People's Party. However, in this whole process of assimilation and integration, the Baloch people were ignored until September 11 took place, which forced the power elite of Pakistani to change its policy in the region. This also pushed Islamabad to rethink its policy towards Balochistan.

The task of auditing the process of "peace making" in Balochistan in an open and free environment was not easy to accomplish. Initially, it was thought that the peace audit exercise should take place in Quetta or Karachi.

However, during the consultative process with potential participants and SAFHR partners in Pakistan, it was realized that it should be held outside the country where participants would be able to share their views without any interference.

Finally, Kathmandu was decided to be the venue for peace audit exercise on Balochistan. It was third such exercise held by SAFHR. In this peace audit report we present a summary of the views and perspectives presented by the participants. The audit exercise was held on July 28-30 2002 and attended by representatives of Baloch people’s political organizations, Baloch political parties, academics, journalists as well as peace and human rights activists from Pakistan.

The first peace audit organized by SAFHR was held in Dhulikhel, Nepal on 8-11 September 1999, which examined different aspects of the peace processes in Nagaland (India) and the Chittagong Hill Tracts (Bangladesh).

The report of the first audit was published as SAFHR paper5.

The second peace audit exercise was held in Bangkok on 30 August – 2

September 2000 that took an account of peace process in Sri Lanka. The report reflects on the various dimensions of peace problematic in the war torn country where over 60,000 people have lost their lives in search of a dignified political settlement of the dispute. SAFHR published the report of Sri Lankan peace audit as SAFHR paper 8

The third peace audit exercise was unique in the sense that the Baloch national question, unlike the Naga, Chakma and Sri Lankan Tamil nationalist struggles in the region has till date received very little international attention and support from human rights community of the region. It was probably the first time that the issue was discussed at the regional level and facilitated by a regional human rights body – the South Asia Forum for Human Rights.

I, finally, take this opportunity to thank all those who participated in the exercise and contributed working notes. SAFHR is also thankful to Baloch people living in countries other than Pakistan who showed great enthusiasm for the peace audit. We received large number of queries about the peace audit and requests from people who wanted to attend the audit exercise but we could not accommodate all of them given our limited resources and other constraints. This enthusiasm encourages us at the South Asia Forum for Human Rights and we are committed to continue our work on the Baloch national question and the search for a sustainable peace in Balochistan. We bring out this report in the hope that it will generate wider dialogue and broaden the scope and understanding of the national aspirations of the Baloch people and the peace question in Balochistan in particular and in Pakistan in general.

Shahid Fiaz

June 2003

Section 1

History of the Peace Process in Balochistan

  1. Introduction

The question of peace, human rights and justice for Baloch people is embedded in the colonial history of the region and the very formation of Pakistan. The origin of the conflict can be traced back in the early days of the country when the newly formed state of Pakistan was in the process of consolidating its control over the territory it “inherited” as a result of the partition of the British Indian Empire. The annexation of Baloch territory into Pakistan did not face much of a popular resistance but the "one nation, one people" policy of the central government failed to integrate the Baloch people into the folds of Pakistani nation as was the case with other ethnic and national minorities of Pakistan.

The political developments of the first two decades are marred by uneven development, which resulted from the central government’s policy of negation of language, culture and ethnic identities of nationalities in an attempt to create a highly centralized state apparatus. The first constitution adopted in 1956 acknowledged the federal nature of Pakistan but failed to recognize the existence of distinct ethnic groups in Pakistan. The 1962 constitution had failed to recognize the federal character of Pakistan. This was the period when the One Unit policy” was enforced. During this period, Baloch people were the most neglected, discriminated and isolated. They had no political representation in the power structure of the country.

The national and the nationality question in the context of peace, human rights and democracy is something that spills over the defined boundaries of ethno–nationalism. Nation states became even more oppressive and tyrannical in the post-colonial era. The old forms of oppression, and discrimination continue to subjugate masses under the garb of nationhood and the need to build a strong unified nation. Thus, raising fundamental questions of social justice, equality and democracy for the members of the “marginal and the inferior” peoples within the “nation” becomes important.

Excluding those who are not a part of the main national identity is a common practice among the post-colonial nation states in South Asia. Bangladesh, which got its independence as recently as in 1971 from Pakistan and formed a new nation state also failed to incorporate into its constitution sufficient safeguards for the protection of the rights of the ethnic and religious minorities. This failure led to practices, which caused massive migration of Bengali Hindus from Bangladesh to India. The rejection of the legitimate demands of the indigenous people of the CHT for protection of their cultural and religious identities led to more than a decade long armed struggle. Though a peace accord was signed in 1997, a democratic resolution of the dispute still eludes the CHT people and Dhaka. Substantial questions of regional autonomy and the return of the land and other resources to the uprooted CHT people remain unrealised. The half a decade old peace talks between the Indian government and the Naga nationalists are yet to enter substantive stage. The national question, intrinsically a complex issue, therefore, demands a greater understanding from a broader perspective and the framework of human rights, democratic practices and social justice.

The two-day deliberations of Baloch national question held in Kathmandu raises a number of serious issues, which in a sense go beyond the limitations of mere nationalist aspirations of the Baloch people. It was observed that even within the small group of participants serious differences surfaced in a manner that call for a deeper understanding of the national question.

Gender relations in a nationalist movement It is imperative to recognize that people have different understandings of the issues relating to rights and justice. And this understanding is determined by their position in the power structure of a society and the space they occupy in the struggle for justice. They have different identities and diverse roles. An individual’s ethnic identity alone or one's affiliation with a specific national group does not necessarily define or determine his or her political relationship with other members of the group. For instance, at the outset of the deliberations of the peace audit, a woman participant pointed out that it was necessary to understand, "why women are so poor in Balochistan" for a proper understanding of the internal dynamics of the Baloch national question. This aspect was discussed in a later session and it added a new perspective to the whole issue and informed the discussion on gender relations within Baloch society where women continue to be in a subordinate position.

In many indigenous societies, though women have a significant role, they lack individual or collective rights. Their participation and representation in the decision making process is almost nil. Interestingly, while a women participant wanted this issue to be discussed by the group as a whole, most of the other participants argued that the Baloch tribal system provided women with sufficient protection and the Baloch women had a different role to play in Baloch society. It was clear that male participants had a different view of society from that of the women who were usually unheard, or not allowed to speak when such issues were discussed.

However, during the course of discussions all the women participants expressed strong opinion about what was called subordinate role of women in Baloch society. They brought forth some vital issues and concerns into the discussion that fore grounded the gender question. These issues confronted the popular view of nationalism. The women participants felt that the Baloch society was “a union of men”, where women were not allowed to play their due political and social role. Their subordinate position never changed no matter what role they were assigned to in the course of their lives. It was pointed out that the Baloch men took all decisions regarding lives of the women. Even the mobility of women was limited within the boundaries of the house. Women had no say in the family decisions and control over family resources.

The question of legitimacy of any political movement remains unanswered until such movements are capable of addressing the gender issue. The inability of a predominantly patriarchal leadership to recognize the rights of women to equal social and political status in a nationalist movement represents a serious challenge. The necessity to make the nationalist aspirations gender sensitive and more inclusive was clear from the discussion. 

The role of tribal elite in the nationalist movement

What role can or should the traditional elites of the indigenous communities play in a movement for justice and political rights? How to transcend the tribal identities and build a national movement that would be inclusive and democratic? How inclusive could it be in terms of participation of those who were not necessarily a part of the tribes but were part of the larger ethnic/linguistic millue? Could women be treated equally as men and would they get equal rights in such a society or movement? These were the questions which came up in the group discussions. There were mixed reaction to these issues; however, majority of the participants were of the view that the issues of caste, class and gender within a tribal society could be addressed and in the Baloch context attempts were being made to resolve these issues.

Participants felt that the Baloch tribal system was different from other tribal systems and internally it functioned on democratic principles. The tribal chiefs were elected through consensus and people of tribe had the right to dislodge the chiefs if and when necessary.

Secondly, it was important to understand whether tribal nationalism could be the answer to the larger questions of political nationhood relating to the principles of democracy, human rights and social justice. The recent history of Baloch national movement was examined from the perspective of the growth of democratic institutions and its ability to question the notion of tribal supremacy and racial superiority. The question was asked how to democratize the tribal foundations of Baloch society and lead people towards liberation without destroying the bonds and the cultural markers of the indigenous system? In the Baloch context, the role of educated elite was significant as the majority of educated elite had strong affinities with tribal chieftains and tended to espouse conservative values.

Federal solution or secession?

The constitutional history of Pakistan is marked with many interruptions.

The first constitution was not adopted until 1956. Within three years it was abrogated. The second constitution was promulgated in 1962 but was replaced by the 1973 constitution, which is currently operative although it was suspended for years under martial law. The military rulers have amended current constitution to the extent that it has virtually lost its legitimacy.

The first two constitutions did not recognise the Baloch people as a distinct national group. It was the 1973 constitution, which granted Balochistan the status of a province. In all the three constitutions of Pakistan, the preamble declares that, divine sovereignty is exercised in trust by the people of Pakistan and it is their will to establish an "order" ordained by God. Unfortunately, it is not the people of Pakistan, but the ruling elite who have always interpreted the “order ordained by god” and exercised that “will”. As a result the “will” of Baloch people was never honoured and the interventions by the centre in the affairs of Balochistan continued uninterruptedly. Finally in 1973, under Z.A. Bhutto's government a massive military operation started, it lasted till the ouster of Bhutto government from power by the military ruler general Zia-ul-Haq in 1977. The people of Balochistan, in the last fifty-five years of their history, have tried to live within the federal arrangement with dignity. This right has been denied to them by all the governments who ruled the centre. In such a situation, some critical questions arise. One is tempted to ask: why was not the constitution of Pakistan able to guarantee and ensure a just and dignified relation between the provinces and the centre? What are the possible mechanisms and instruments to address the national question of Balochistan – and can the national aspirations of the Baloch people be accommodated within the federal arrangements of Pakistan is the struggle for right to self- determination leading towards secession or the only way out? Similarly it is important to ask: has the nationalist leadership of Balochistan the capacity and the mass support to create and sustain a new state in the present imperialist world order? And, will the new state be able to change the imperialist economic and political order to provide their people with democratic governance, and a dignified livelihood?

Politics of Resources:

The rich natural resources and the geo-strategic significance of Balochistan, in a sense, has been an important contributor to much of its troubles. The so-called “resource card” has been played upon by all the actors who matter in the politics of the province. In the last fifty years, people of the province have been deprived of the benefits of these resources by the centre. For instance, natural gas is supplied to part of the country except to the people of Balochistan. However, it would be a total misconception to link the sporadic battles for control over natural resources by one tribe with the question of autonomy, or for that matter with the overall democratic struggle in Pakistan, because the tribal leadership has basically protected just its own interests irrespective of what people aspired on the issue. The electoral history of the country also witnesses that no political opponent was ever allowed to successfully challenge the established tribal leadership and its political authority. That is probably one of the reasons why central governments found it much easier to deal with tribal leaders on one-to-one basis rather than dealing with the masses on the issue of resource distribution, thus, successfully isolating non-tribal political parties that advocated a broader dialogue on resource allocation and distribution. As a result, we find that the political agenda of Gwader, or of Mekran division, is different from the politics of Dera Bugtti.

Secondly, international powers also have vast economic and strategic interests in this area. At times, it seems hard to de-link these interests from the tribal interests. The increasing Chinese investment in development projects and US military presence in Balochistan carry serious consequences for political aspirations of the people. The royalty of natural gas brings no benefits for the ordinary people of Balochistan as the funds are usurped by the tribal chiefs. The question arises: what will the development of Gwader deep-sea port, coastal highway or gas and oil exploration projects bring to the ordinary people?

Thirdly, these projects are viewed differently in different regions of the province. The point of view in Gwader, with regard to the development of area, is different from how rest of the region views these projects. For example, both the people and the leadership, where mega projects are underway, have a more “pragmatic” approach towards the development schemes. They are concerned about displacement of population, creation of new employment opportunities for local people, environmental impact and influx of non- Baloch people into the area. This also determines the outlook of their politics and can be witnessed in the overall formation of political parties in Balochistan.

2. Balochistan: a Brief History

Land and the people

Balochistan meaning the ‘land of Baloch’ is a vast territory of some 225,000 square miles located on the southern Iranian plateau. The Bloch homeland commands more than 900 miles of Arabian sea coastline, including the northern shore of the Strait of Harmuz through which oil tankers bound for the West and Japan must pass on their way to the Persian Gulf. Strategically Balochistan occupies a very important position. Throughout history invading armies have passed through Balochistan including Macedonians, Sassanid, Persians, Sindhi Brahmins, Arabs, Seljuk Turks, Afghans, Mongols and Tatars.

Who are the Baloch

Baloch people, historically, are known as a non-sedentary race that moved from one place to another in search of food and pasture. The majority of Baloch are Sunni Muslim but there is a significant population who belong to the Zikri sect and most of them live in Makran region, and Lasbela.

Anthropologists are of the view that Bloch people belong to the Chaldean branch of the Semitic people, owing their name to the Babylonian King Belus. The traditional view claims that Blochs were a tribe dwelling in the area of Allepo, in what now is Syria, prior to the emergence of Islam.

Between 1928 and 1948, the Baloch people were divided by the boundaries of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan by the British; there are also approximately fifty thousand Balochs who reside in Turkmenistan. The incorporation of Baloch areas in Iran and Pakistan in 1928 and 1948 respectively are resented by the Balochs on both sides of the border.

The social origins of the national movement

Baloch struggle for the independence is embedded in their very existence.

The people of Baloch origin were separated by the colonial British rulers without guaranteeing their accepted international rights. The invasion of Kalat state by British in 1839 followed the introduction of Sundeman System that awarded great powers to the Sardars who were loyal to the British rule.

The new system completely ignored the Khan of Kalat as a ruler. In the following years, in order to solace local population British installed Mir Naseer Khan II, as ruler but these measures could not lessen the hatred which was inculcated by the occupation.

The British continued to conspire against the people of Balochistan by creating internal conflicts among the various sections of Baloch population.

In 1893, Mir Khudadad Khan was detained by the British and his son Mir Mehmood Khan was appointed as the Khan. There were some examples of revolt against British occupation organized by some tribes. The most of them was Zehri tribe who lost its leader in a battle in 1894 against foreign rule. The other significant rebellion movement was initiated by the people of Makran division but the movement suffered great losses due the betrayal of some of its trusted companion and primitive weaponry.

Anjuman-e-Itehad-e-Balochistan formed by Mir Yousuf Aziz Magsi and Abdul Aziz Kurd and started underground activities for liberation of Balochistan till 1931. In 1937, a new party emerged from which started its political work under the name of Kalat State National Party. The Party declared that it would unite Baloch people with one center and their own representative government. This party had the support of the Khan of Kalat and was totally against the Sardars. This position soured its relations of Sardars who also took position against the leadership of the Kalat State National Party. In 1939, under the pressure from British, and Sardars declared the party illegal and its leadership including Malik Abdul Raheem Khuaja Khel, Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo, Abdul Kareem Shorish, Gul Khan Naseer were exiled from the Kalat state.

The party was not allowed to contest for elections held in 1947 though the leadership of the party in their individual capacity contested the elections and won thirty-nine out of fifty-two seats in the Lower House. This was the time when Pakistan had also come into existence but the Khan of Kalat had declared Kalat as an independence State.

On December 14, 1947, the leader of the National Party, Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo reiterated. That "we have a distinct civilization and a separate culture ike that of Iran and Afghanistan. We are Muslims but it is not necessary that by virtue of being Muslims we should loose our freedom and merge with others. If the mere fact that we are Muslims requires us to join Pakistan then Afghanistan and Iran, both Muslim countries, should also amalgamate with Pakistan…we were never a part of India before the British rule…Pakistan’s unpleasant and loathsome desire that our national homeland, Balochistan, should merge with it is impossible to consider. We are ready to have friendship with that country on the basis of sovereign equality but by no means ready to merge with Pakistan. We are told that Baloch cannot defend themselves in the atomic age. Well, are Afghanistan, Iran and even Pakistan capable of defending themselves? Today, if Russia and America so desire they can wipe out many such states from the world map. If we cannot defend ourselves, a lot of other cannot do either…As regards the question of statehood, let me emphasize that no Asian country including Pakistan fulfills the criteria of a modern state in the crude sense…They say we must join Pakistan for economic reasons. That is also absurd. We have numerous means of income: we have minerals, we have petroleum and we have ports.

We should not be made slaves on the pretext of economic viability. We can survive without Pakistan. But the question is what Pakistan would be without us…? I do not propose to create hurdles for the newly created Pakistan in the matters of defense and external communication. But we want an honourable relationship not a humiliating one. If Pakistan wants to treat us as a sovereign people, we are ready to extend the hand of friendship and cooperation. If Pakistan does not agree to do so, flying in the face of democratic principles, such an attitude will be totally unacceptable to us, and if we are forced to accept this fate then every Baloch son will sacrifice his life in defense of his national freedom".

On 4 January 1948, the upper House comprising Sardars met and discussed the question of merger with Pakistan. The house declared that "This House is not willing to accept merger with Pakistan which will endanger the separate existence of the Baloch nation". The parliament was once again convened in Dhadar on 25 February 1948. The Prime Minister spoke favoring the accession to Pakistan but Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo again made his speech against the merger.

On 1 April 1948 the Pakistan army attacked Kalat. Khan surrendered and accepted the merger by signing an agreement. The legal status of Nepal and Kalat were different from that of the other princely states in the Indian subcontinent as other native states were dealing British India government in New Delhi while Nepal and Kalat maintained their treaty relations directly with Whitehall.

In 1958, Pakistan army again marched into the Kalat state under the pretext of secessionist movement. The following years, saw a huge political turmoil.

General Yahya Khan replaced president Ayub Khan in 1969 and dissolved one-unit and held elections. The National Awami Party emerged as the majority party in Balochistan. Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo was appointed the governor of Balochistan and NAP formed the provincial government.

The NAP government was dismissed and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the then prime minister and civil martial law administrator appointed Akber Bugti as the Governor of Balochistan and military operation was started against the Baloch people. Although there are no accurate statistics regarding the number of casualties but one could not dispute the claims that there were large number of casualties on both sides in the army operation that continued from 1973 to 1977 till General Zia-ul-Haq took over Pakistan. In jail, serious differences developed between the Baloch and Pashtoon leaders. Khan Abdulwali Khan had assured the Baloch leaders of the support of the Pakhtoons for the arm struggle. But no support came. The Pashtoons in Balochistan have been complaining of about unequal status in government services according to their population. The Baloch leadership takes a position that they have supported demand of a separate province of the Pashtoon comprising of pushtoon districts therefore, they was no reason to accommodate these demands. However, Pashtoonkhwa Milli Awami Party (PKMAP), led by Mehmood Khan Achakzai, advocates equal rights for the Pashtoon living in Balochistan as they are the citizens of this province.

Impact of the armed struggle

The armed struggle of Baloch people against the Pakistani forces had a negative impact on the movement in the long run. General Zia-ul-Haq, announced a general amnesty for the guerillas and promised rehabilitation of the displaced families, which remained unfulfilled. The poorly trained and armed guerillas against a professional army, without any foreign support could produce no better results. The failure of the tribal forces also brought a new realization for a more active participation of masses.

3. Chronology of Events

1839 - The British invade Kalat. Khan of Kalat Mir Mehrab Khan is killed and the Sundamen System is introduced that gives the Khan a nominal position

1876 - The Bristish obtain treaty rights to station troops in return for subsidies and guarentee of tribal autonomy

1920 - Mir Yousuf Aziz Magsi and Abdul Aziz Kurd form the Anjumane-Ithahad-e-Balochan

1931 - Mir Yousuf Aziz Magsi takes over the leadership of Anjuman-e-Itahad-e-Balochan

1937 - A new party in the name of Kalat National Party emerges from the Anjuman-e-Itahad-e-Balochan

1939 - Kalat National Party is declared illegal and its leaders Malik Abdul Raheem Khuajakhel, Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo, Abdul Kareem Shorish, Gul Khan Naseer and other exiled from Kalat State. Party establishes headquarters in Quetta

1947 - Elections held; Kalat National Party barred from contesting, Its leaders contest elections in individual capacity, win thirty-nine out of fifty-two seats in the Lower House; Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo speaks against merger with Pakistan

1948 - The Upper House meets and rejects merger with Pakistan; Pakistan army attacks Kalat, the Khan surrenders and accepts merger- Prince Abdul Karim (the younger brother of the Khan) leads a revolt and tries to cross over Afghan border but is arrested

1958 - Pakistan army once again moves in Kalat with the pretext that Prince Abdul Karim has prepared a force to make Balochistan independent with Afghanistan’s support- Nawab Nouroz Khan comse down from his hiding in the hills; his son and followers executed while Nawab Nouroz Khan dies in jail in 1964

1967 - Baloch Students Organization (BSO) formed in Karachi with the amalgamation of several Baloch student bodies to carry out cultural and academic activities; BSO later splits into two groups

1969 - Yahya Khan replaces president Ayub Khan; one unit dissolved and elections held

1972 - National Awami Party forms Coalition government with JUI; Sardar Attaullah Mengal as the first chief Minister of Balochistan - Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo becomes the governor of Balochistan

1973 - Soviet-made arms discovered in the Iraqi embassy at Islamabad -

The government alleges arms meant for the liberation movement in Balochistan - NAP denies allegations – Mengal led governement dismissed and NAP leaders Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizanjo, Sardar Attaullah Mengal and Khair Baksh Marri imprisoned – Army operation launched in Balochistan

1977 - Zulfikar Ali Bhutto ousted- Zai-ul- Haq takes over- Military regime announces general amnesty for the Baloch leaders and gueraillas - Negotiations between Zia and the Baloch leaders fail

1979 - BSO’s council session amends its clause of provincial autonomy with that of right to self-determination

1981- Hameed Baloch a prominent member of BSO executed on the order of a special military court for attacking the Omani delegate Colonel Khanfan - Street protests take place

1983 - The two factions of BSO merge

1986 - BSO splits again later to form two separate parties Progressivce Youth Movement ( PYM) and Balochistan National Youth Movement

1988 - Elections held in Pakistan- The newly formed Balochistan National Alliance (BNA) formed by BNYM and Nawab Akber Bugti wins a large number of seats in the Balochistan assembly and forms government with Nawab Akber Bugti as Chief Minister - Mir Ghaus Baksh Bizano’s PNP losses elections

1990 - Balochistan National Movement (earlier BNYM) splits into two groups – one led by Dr. Abdul Hayee Baloch and the other by Akhtar Mengal

1997 - BNM (Mengal) and Pakistan National Party (PNP) merge to form a new party by the name of Balochistan National Party (BNP) with Sardar Attaullah Mengal as its chief. The party wins a substantial number of seats in the provincial assembly and forms a coalition government with Jhamhoori Watan Party (JWP) and Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) - Akhtar Mengal is the Chief Minister

1998 - Pakistan conducts nuclear test in Chagai (Balochistan) in response to India’s test in Pokhran. BSO holds protest rallies against the nuclear tests. BNP Splits into two groups – BNP (Mengal) and BNP (Awami). Mengal-led government losses majority in the provincial assembly - Muslim League withdraws support as well - Akhtar Mengal resigns as Chief Minister

1999 - Pakistan government commemorates the day of nuclear test as Youm-e-Takbeer thoughout the country on May 28, 1999, while blackday is observed throughout Balochistan against the nuclear tests

4. Major Political Forces in Balochistan

Baluchistan National Movement (BNM)

The Baluchistan National Movement (BNM) emerged from Baloch Student's Organisation. In the beginning, it was called Balochistan National Youth Movement (BNYM). In 1989, during its annual session, the word "Youth" was removed and it became Balochistan National Movement. The new party opened its membership to all age groups and made inroads among the masses.

In 1990, before the general elections, the party split into two groups – one led by Dr. Abdul Hayee Baloch and the other by Sardar Akhtar Mengal, the son of veteran Baloch leader Sardar Attaullah Mengal. After 1997 elections, BNM (Mengal) formed a coalition government in Balochistan.

Presently, Balochistan National Movement (BNM) is led by Dr. Abdul Hayee Baloch and has a clear stand against the domination of Sardar and Nawab centered politics over Baloch national struggle. The party has a good organization all over Balochistan but their strength is much more visible in Makran Division and have always won three to four provincial assembly seats from this area. BNM comprises activists with communist background-those who view Baloch nationalist struggle from Marxist point of view.

Balochistan National Party (BNP)

The veteran Baloch leader Sardar Attaullah Mengal on his return from London after ending self-exile formed this party. The party formed as result of a merger of two major political leaders of the province when two leaders of Baloch national struggle – Sardar Attaullah Mengal and Mir Ghause Buksh Bazinju decided to struggle together. They abandoned their respective parties, Baluchistan National Movement (Mengal) and Pakistan National Party. The merger took place on the condition that the leadership of Pakistan National Party would replace provincial autonomy with right to self-determination.

Pakistan National Party while merging with BNP lost the support of important leadership from Karachi which decided to continue working under the banner of PNP.

Though, the new party was welcomed by many in Baluchistan, several political workers felt the domination of sardars, businessmen and other opportunist elements in the party. Key party positions were given to those who always had opposed the Baluch nationalist movement. The party won a large number of seats in 1997 elections and formed a coalition government with the support of Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP), Jamaiate-Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) and Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz). The son of Sardar Attaullah Mengal, Sardar Akhtar Mengal became the Chief Minister of Balochistan.

Balochistan National Party saw another split during the council session of the party when Moheen Khan, with the support of six provincial assembly members formed its Awami Group. Akhtar Mengal resigned from the Chief Ministership after losing support of the Awami group.

Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP)

Jamhoori Watan Party (JWP) is headed by powerful tribal chief Nawab Akhbar Khan Bughti. The party was formed in 1990 after the dissolution of Balochistan National Alliance government. Nawab Akbar Khan Bughti was Chief Minister of the alliance government. Jamhori Watan Patry is limited to oil and gas rich area Dera Bughti and Naseerabad districts where the Nawab has total control over party, politics, and natural resources.

Governments often have to please him for the smooth running of gas and oil supply to other areas. Nawab Bughti has played both nationalist and antinationalist roles depending on his political and economic interests. He was appointed as governor of Balochistan when Z. A. Bhutto dismissed nationlist government of Sardar Attaullah Mengal before starting military action in Balochistan.

Pashtoon Khawa Milli Awami Party (PKMAP)

Pashtoon Khawa Milli Awami Party (PKMAP) primarily represents the interests of Pashtoons living in Balochistan but advocates a homeland for all pashtoons living in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Formed in 1987, this party is an extension of Pashtoon Khawa Milli Party which was formed in 1971 after the liberation of Bangladesh. The present party is result of merger of Pashtoon Khawa National Awami Party and a faction of Mazdoor Kisan Party. The main slogan and program of the new party is Pashtoonistan (homeland for Pashtoons) within Pakistan. Sardar Mehmood Khan Achakzai is the chairman of the party.

Baloch People's Liberation Front

The Baluch People’s Liberation Front (BPLF) was a guerilla force formed with a strong membership of 7500 persons who fought against the Pakistan military from 1973 to 1977. A 2700 strong cadre of the front was based in the Afghanistan while 1700 were scattered in different parts of Pakistani Baluchistan. Approximatley 3000 cadre, mostly Marris, were “active reservists” who worked in Karachi and other parts of Sindh. The front had a mass appeal among the youth and students due to its revolutionary ideas with a dream to create "Greater Baluchistan" comprising all Baloch territories of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan.

When the communists took-over Afghanistan in 1978, the nationalist leadership hailed it as a good omen for the liberation movement in Baluchistan. However, the Soviets invasion of Afghanistan disappointed most BPLF leadership including Nawab Khair Baksh Marri, who wanted a non-aligned Baluchistan.

There had been allegations regarding receiving support from Peking and Moscow for the ‘liberation’ movement. The cadres of the front have disappeared over the years or have merged with mainstream political parties.

According to historians, Pakistan army killed thousands of Balochs in the military action. Inayatullah Balochs, a historian and teacher of the West Asia Institute in Heidelberg University, states that "Pakistani troops suffered about eight to ten thousand casualties. The number of guerillas and their casualties is not reliably known, thousands of Baluch civilians were killed in the military action and bombardments by the Pakistani air force, and thousands migrated to Afghanistan or took refuge in Sindh or Derajat in Pakistan".

Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI)

The partition of India also partitioned Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind giving birth to Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, the Pakistani version of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind. JUI has good support among the Pashtoons of Balochistan and NWFP and the party has been present in almost all assemblies in these two provinces.

Presently it has majority government in NWFP and partner in Balochistan assembly. Party has also significant presence in national assembly and the senate of Pakistan.

JUI is radical Islamic party with a strong support base in Balochistan. This party was instrumental in the formation of Talibans regime in Afghanistan and runs thousand of religious schools (Madaras) in all over Pakistan. The party is headed by Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman.

Muslime League

Muslim league does not have mass base in Balochistan but ruling elite of Pakistan has alliance with some powerful families of Balochistan. These families have their constituencies and are in a postion to make or break seats in the provincial assemblies with the help of the centre. The present provincial government is headed by Muslim a leaguer.

Pakistan People's Party

The Pakistan people's Party could not develop roots in Balochistan, because it was a staunch centrist political force and the party had supported military operation against Baloch people in 1973 when Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was the civilian chief martial law administrator.

Pakistan National Party

Pakistan National Party (PNP) was headed by the well-known Baloch leader Mir Ghause Baksh Bizanju who most of his politial life advocated provincial autonomy instead of secession from Pakistan. The party had its branches in all provinces of Pakistan till its merger with Balochistan National Party.

The merger proved to be fatal for the party which lost most of its leadership and cadre in other provinces of the country. After the death of Bizanju his son tried to organize the party but his opportunist politics was rejected by the people. This party played a major role in the politics of the province but does not exist anymore.

Baloch Student's Organiation (BSO)

Baluch Students Organisation (BSO) was one of the strongest political and intellectual forces in Baloch history. Formed in 1967 in Karachi with amalgamation of regional Baloch student bodies in order to promote cultural activities it soon became the centre of political activities of students and Baloch youth.

Influenced by socialist ideas, BSO played very active role in intellectual work and mobilization of masses. It also encouraged students of far-flung areas to seek admissions in educational institutions of Karachi and strongly rejected the leadership of Sardars. During 1970's general elections, BSO played an important part in bringing National Awami Party into power in Baluchistan. While NAP was in power, BSO was divided into two groups as some sections of the students were not satisfied with NAP and PPP relationship.

BSO advocates the right to self-determination of Baloch people. Its leader Hameed Baluch was executed in 1981 by a special military court established by military regime of Zia-ul-Haq.

Pakistan Oppressed Nations' Movement (PONAM)

This is an alliance of several parties which have resolved to struggle jointly along with nationalist parites of other provinves. Although, the leadership of the alliance belongs to Balochistan but many ethinic parties have joined the movement including Sindhi, Pashtoon, and Saraiki ethnic groups and parties.

 

Section 2

  1. Nationality Question and the Federal Solution in Pakistan

Dr. Jaffer Ahmed, Director of the Paksitan Studies Centre, Karachi University presented the complex history of constitutional arrangement and autonomy question in Pakistan. He stressed the need for a democratic political arrangement through sharing of powers among the federating units of Pakistan in order to achieve a viable and lasting solution to the nationality question. While giving a brief resume on the national question in Pakistan he said, "We all know that national aspirations have been there in Balochistan even earlier and were consolidated in the modern time when modern politics began in the province. The Baloch nationalist movement is linked with nationalist aspiration in other parts of South Asia. There have been very strong national aspirations in Balochistan and we witness that in the twentieth century the first nationalist organisation emerged in Balochistan".

The role of leadership of Muslim League vis a vis Balochistan was condemnable as it forgot all the promises it had made to the Balochs before the creation of Pakistan. A highly centralized policy was adopted to govern the federating units instead of giving people the right to govern themselves.

Since, Balochistan was not a province of Pakistan, the ruling class of the newly established state, taking advantage of this situation, decided to put Balochistan under Governor's rule. This undemocratic attitude towards the Baloch people fuelled the already heightened tension between the people of Balochistan and the centre.

Although, Balochistan was granted provincial status in 1971 the question of autonomy remained unsettled. At the same time, a peculiar situation arose when Pakistan People's Party, which had its government in the centre, named its governor for the province by ignoring the verdict of the people. This act was seen as insulting the people of Balochistan and was resisted not only by the Baloch but all nationalist forces in the country. The duel system of governance also created a lot of problems in those years of history of Pakistan.

There was presidential system in the centre but provinces were being run through parliamentary system. The following years saw a brutal military operation in Balochistan which continued incessantly for many years in one or another form.

The leadership at the centre did not have the political will to address the issue of national minorities through the framework of an adequate constitutional arrangement based on the aspirations of the people. On the other hand, the leadership of National Awami Party (NAP) also failed to assert the issue of autonomy during the talks with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Instead, they were looking for some immediate and insignificant political advantages by ignoring the issue of autonomy. The 1973 constitution was a highly centralised political arrangement which did not address the core issues and problems of federation for a multi-cultural, multi-national polity. Because of its overtly centralized nature, this arrangement failed. Paksitan, despite fifty five years of independence, was not able to evolve a system of representation acceptable to the people and nationalities of the country. For instance, the resources of Balochistan are being used by all of Pakistan except Baloch people which have serious consequences for Pakistani state and society in the days to come. It is clear that until and unless Pakistan addresses these issues, the nationalist aspirations of the Baloch people and other national minorities will continue to flounder.

Habib Jalib, the secretary general of Balochistan National Party focused on the present state of politics vis a vis federating units in Pakistan. His analysis represented the political aspirations of the majority of Baloch people. He said that parliamentary form of democracy could have provided federal solution of the national question, had it been given a chance to function from the beginning. The obsession of Pakistani ruling elite with martial laws and the consequent continued disruption of democratic process in Pakistan were more harmful to its existence than the so-called secessionist movements. These movements were the natural outcome of a situation in which people were denied the right to a peaceful and a just democratic political setup. The recent dissolution of the parliament by the military rulers created more unrest and the Provisional Constitutional Order promulgated by the military regime now further polarise and divide the political classes in the country. The nationalist forces have come to the conclusion, that the present political order is a direct outcome of the changing international political imperatives in the region. With a General Musharraff's full support to US led international campaign against terrorism, intelligence agencies have been given a free hand to curb and oppress national minorities and their related political movements in the country by converting the campaign against terrorism into an opportunity to settle score with opponent political forces.

According to Mr. Jalib, the Baloch are facing a special type of internal colonialism. The province has been converted into 47 blocks in order to exploit the natural resources, particularly oil and gas. This development has given a new dimension to the Baloch question. Till, as late as 1970 the Baloch used to think that federation was better than the centralism and that a solution was possible within a federal framework. But things have changed rapidly in the last few years. Balochistan never received its due share from the centre in fifity-five years of exploitation of its natural resources. The wealth and resource of Balochistan contribute to the development of whole of Pakistan, except Balochistan.

After September 11, the United States assumed the role of the world policeman and subsequent decision of Pakistan to provide military bases to the United States in Balochistan and other parts of the country held grave consequences for the people of Balochistan and their nationalist aspirations.

The increasing presence of US military in Balochistan may bring a new kind of political repression on the arena as the rulers can now link a nationalist movement with terrorism.

Another significant point to note is the mounting pressure of the big players of region in the area. Besides the military presence of the United States in the province, the Chinese have been invited to revive their investment plans in Balochistan. The establishment of Gowader deep-sea port, construction of coastal highway, and a naval base can change the demographic balance in Balochistan. According to an estimate, these projects would bring about 500,000 non-Baloch people in Gwader and its adjacent localities reducing the local population to a vulnerable minority. The issue of over 0.7 million Afghans is yet to be settled. It had great pressure on the meagre resources of Balochistan. The armed forces have already moved towards Dera Bugti which produces 56% of energy used by Punjabi industrialists. The Baloch people are looking for a respectable resolution of the national question, but in the existing political framework they cannot trust the ruling classes of Pakistan in the search for a solution.

2.State of Education

Jan Muhammad Dashti, in his paper, presented an account of deteriorating state of education in the province of Balochistan. By linking education with poverty and social infrastructure in the province, he attempted to evaluate social policy of the government towards the most neglected and backward region of Pakistan where over 70 percent of population lives under the socalled poverty line. Mr. Dashti was very critical of the role international financial institutions and the NGOs in Balochistan. To him, these organizations were completely unaware of the local realities of the province.

He was particularly critical of the government's education policy in Balochistan saying that government of Balochistan had decided to increase tuition fees and hostel charges many-fold. The newly revised fee for bachelor and master degrees in various disciplines had gone 400% higher than the existing fee structure and the highest increase in one-go for any institution in the history of Pakistan. In a province where education ratio was the lowest and where more than 70 percent of the population was living beyond subsistence level this step was a lethal blow for the people of Balochistan and a clear negation of professed aim of the government to enhance higher education in the province. It was estimated that 70% of the population in Balochistan was living below the poverty line. It is estimated that only 4% people in the province was earning Rs. 100,0000 annually and the ratio for those earning more was nearly 1% of the entire population, which meant that 99% families would not be able to send their children to the university.

It was also noteworthy that the University of Balochistan was keeping huge staff and highly paid employees from other provinces. During the last few years, living conditions of most people had worsened. Real income of most households had declined sharply. Malnutrition was rampant. Food production had fallen relative to population, and social services had deteriorated both in quantity and quality. All these problems had been occurring at a time when the country was implementing social and economic reforms prescribed by major donors and financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Statistics showed that there had been very little development in educational infrastructure during the period of Structural Adjcement Programme (SAP).

The increase in population had rendered the number of parliamentary seats fixed 30 years ago unrealistic and the proposed increase in seats is not substantial. Roughly, it means one person representing nearly 400,000 souls.

If the intention of the government was to make constituencies manageable and more representative then the seats should have been increased up to 600 in the lower house of parliament in order to give proper representation to the masses. People of Balochistan had been struggling since long for proper representation in constitutional bodies of the state. While determing the number of seats Balochistan should have been given reasonable weightage.

Under the proposed plan Balochistan had been given representation apparently on population basis, but even in that, seats should have been far more than the proposed 18. Balochistan population increased from 3.5% to 5.6 %, of the country's population an increase of nearly 60%. Population of Punjab did not have a 60% increase in 1998 from the earlier census, but seats had substantially been increased. Now in an assembly of 350 deputies Punjab would have 196 including one from Islamabad capital area. Thus Punjab would be controlling 56% of the seats in the all powerful lower house of parliament, while population increase in Punjab registered only a 5% but it got an increase of 69%.

Firstly, the quota of seats for women has been revived and raised to 60 as against 10 previously, while 25 seats have been reserved for technocrats.

Both women and technocrats would be elected on proportional representation according to a given party's total poll of votes. Many may think that this is a significant step, because apart from promoting the cause of woman's in national life, it will ensure a better balance in legislative and decision-making processes. The increase in women representation had been taken obviously in line with donor agencies’ well acclaimed, “gender empowerment and equity approach” in third world countries. The need to enhance women’s participation in activities and decision-making processes at all levels is the issue most stressed by these agencies. These agencies put pressure on countries such as Pakistan to adopt policies, which were not commensurate with ground realities. The funding agencies incorporate gender dimensions in donor funded development programmes, and countries like Pakistan have now least options but to follow those multi-national approaches for its internal and external policies. In a broader context of Pakistani society, this increase seems to be intriguing. Even in the western civil societies that the military government is blindly following, there is no quota for women in their policymaking institutions. In a plural democratic society in our immediate neighborhood – India – no such quota in relations with total number of seats in the parliament is fixed. The increase in women’s representation does not imply that these representatives will be representing the whole segment of sexual divide.

Also, the decision to debar those who do not have a college degree is the most controversial clause in electoral reforms. In a way, it is shifting the system of governance of the country from democracy to an obsolete form of aristocracy. It will be a government by a relatively small privileged class and theoretically means the rule of the best few, governing in the ‘interest of the people’. Practically it amounts to denial of a basic human right to a vast majority of our population. Religious minded persons can also see it as a deliberate and blatant insult to majority of early Muslim rulers including some of the Khulfa-i-Rashidin, the Caliphs. Except for Ali bin Abu Talib, remaining three Caliphs had no formal education.

Majority of Muslim rulers and generals from Ghaznavi to Ghori, from Abdali to Akbar in Mughal India, had no formal education. In a tribal traditional society, literacy is not the prime factor for a successful chief or tribal administrator. Even in modern societies one has to fulfill some other important qualifications for being a ruler and among these possessing a degree is not essential or even relevant.

Even in western societies there are numerous examples when not only their legislators but also even many presidents, as of the United States of America, had no formal education but were successful representatives and lawgiver to their people. Among 43 Presidents of the United States of America, which are certainly the role model of NGOs who are dictating the present Government to adopt such ridiculous ideas by debarring almost the entire population of the country from contesting elections, 8 (eight) of them had no formal education.

In Pakistan, the literacy rate has been recorded as 37.8%. This includes people who can read Quran or can write their names or read an address on any envelope; and there are a large number of people who can read only the holy text. Such people have been included among literates in census figures.

Those who have obtained a degree do not cover more than a fraction of overall literacy rate. Therefore, we may calculate our literacy level in the following format:

Total Population of Pakistan 135,135,195

Total Literacy Rate 37.8 %

Informal Literacy (Quran, R.W Skill) 8.0 %

Primary 12.6 %

Middle, Metric and Intermediate 16.5 %

Graduate 0.7 %

No. of Total Literates 51081103.7

No. of Total Graduates 357567.7

July 1998 EST.

Thus, individuals who are qualified to contest elections and become our rulers and lawgivers will be amongst 0.29 % of our population. Therefore massive majority of our population will be barred from contesting elections and will be disfranchised.

The safeguarding of Pakistan nuclear assets was one of the three achievable objectives cited by General Musharaf which were paramount in the decision of abandoning the decades old afghan policy and giving away the proudly mentioned strategic depth by military hierarchy, and siding with western alliance against terrorism. President re-assured in a television interviewer that there is no threat to nuclear assets of the country. In an other development, a two member team from Italy visited Pakistan for talks on nuclear safety.

They reportedly expressed their concern about the possibility that terrorist groups have acquired weapons of mass destruction or may be striving to acquire such weapons. They also met authorities and discussed the effectiveness of control over Pakistan’s fissile material facilities. An analysis regarding atomic assets compels one to wonder whether the nuclear potential of the country is an asset or a liability.

3. Complex Politics of Self-determination and Principles of Reconciliation

Sana ullah Baloch, member of the Senate of Pakistan, in his presentation took a broader look at the nationality question in South Asia. He was of the view that the emergence of territorial states created manifold problems. Many nationalities were divided by artificial boundaries - Kashmiris between India and Pakistan, Pashtoons between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and the Balochs between Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. Similarly, Kurds were divided between Iran, Iraq and Turkey. Mr. Baloch stressed, "We must remember that the colonialists, without account of geographical, cultural, or historical factors drew the boundaries of India, Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan. The "international" boundaries of these countries run through territories inhabited by individual peoples dividing them into several parts. These divided nations are exerting pressure for territorial revision with the object of uniting the people of same racial, linguistic, and cultural background and creating new national states. In the sub- continent national aspirations were suppressed by merging different national entities with no racial or cultural harmony amongst them, to create the state of Pakistan. The remaining sub-continent was put together to form the Indian union in a similar fashion".

The oppressed national minorities of Pakistan are aspiring to be accepted as national entities. The state, although, claims to be a federation does not acknowledge national minorities as having specific geographic, racial and cultural identities. Their homelands have been demarcated and maintained as administrative units and not as autonomous geographical and historical entities forming the federation of Pakistan. India and Iran are pursuing the similar policies towards many nationalities within the union. The South Asian region is facing many problems including poverty, uneven development, unemployment, corruption, sectarian violence, ethnic and national conflicts.

These problems are being exploited by political and religious leadership in favour of their movements. India, probably, is one of the most vulnerable states in south Asia. It is faced with a number of secessionist movements.

The broken promises and lost confidence in the federal structure, the feelings of unease are now shifting towards the struggle of the national right to selfdetermination and the struggle for separate homelands. On the other hand, the remaining Pakistan, is completely under the control of armed forces.

The Punjabi ethnic group with its civil and military bureaucracy holds the command of state institutions. The rest nationalities are deprived not only of avenues of power sharing, but they have been excluded also from the entire arena of state affairs. Presently what we are experiencing in the region, especially in Afghanistan is because of the policies of ruling Punjabi military group. For petty interests, they have put the bordering provinces of Balochistan and NWFP into a continuous war destroying their political cultures, economies and societies. They are compelled to follow the unjust rule of Islamabad for their very survival. The intelligence agencies like ISI and state institutions have introduced Talibanization in order to undermine the national movements of the Balochs and Pashtoons.

Bangladesh, after freedom from Pakistan, is confronted with question of the rights of minorities. The constitution of independent Bangladesh does not recognize minorities as groups distinct from the Bengalis. Everyone is a "Bangladeshi". The question of right to self-determination of the CHT people has badly implicated the political position of Bangladesh. That question needs to be resolved through mutual understanding, agreements and experiences. In Sri Lanka, constitutional denial of autonomy and political, cultural and physical repression against non-ruling nationalities, particularly the Tamils made the situation intolerable for the latter. They have no means to change the constitution. There is need to accept the reality of nationalities and their rights must be safeguarded constitutionally. Nepal’s Constitution has similarly failed to resolve the question of minorities and various national groups. The absence in the constitution of true democratic arrangements of autonomy for the nationalities and regions has made the ruling political culture of the country intolerable for the minorities and the national groups.

The ruling elite in Pakistan soon after independence began to centralize power in their own hands to the complete exclusion of the smaller nationalities. They treated the national state as the focal point of identity, denying the rights of the subject nationalities. The main issue in Pakistani politics was building and sustaining an integrated national consciousness as distinct and different from the Indian identity. So, when Pakistan was established, the rulers thought that the country needed some theoretical base for its existence and people had to be given an identity as the basis for their new political reality. Pakistan’s ideology and the two-nation theory was the slogan, which they raised in order to consolidate their own position on the one hand and to create an atmosphere of hatred and mistrust between India and Pakistan on the other. The immigrant ruling elite of Pakistan from day one started to legitimize its rule over the historically formed and diverse nationalities on the basis of these false theoretical notions. One can notice how a particular group of Pakistani leaders and intelligentsia is very quick in picking up ideas and Islamising them in their attempt to hoodwink the people. Surprisingly, any thing, which appeals to the people, is immediately attached to Islam and Pakistan. Islamic socialism, Islamic democracy, Islamic martial law, Islamic referendum, Islamic nationalism and even Islamic bomb, are mentioned carelessly with few if any qualms with the objective of making the repressive rule acceptable to the recalcitrant masses. The country’s intelligentsia has never played an appreciable role, but only magnified the growing confusion. And, the ruling civil-military aristocracy has been consistent in its refusal to recognize the multi-national character of the country. It has rather stressed the unity and integrity of the country on the basis of its Islamic character.

In 1978 the law minister of Zia-ul-Haq military regime Mr. A. K. Brohi launched a blistering attack on politicians belonging to the political parties of Pakistani's nationalities. He wrote in DAWN in October 1978, “Pakistan is a successor state to British India, which had a unitary, rather than a federal form of Government First there was a Centre, which extended to peripheral parts (now forming Pakistan) and it was this Centre, which delegated powers to the provinces for the sake of administrative convenience. Thus, when Pakistan was founded, it retained its unitary character. Subsequent federalization was merely a result of Center’s progressive decentralization rather than a product of voluntary surrendering of partial sovereignty by the constituent parts of Pakistan. Furthermore, Pakistan was founded on the basis of ‘religion and religion alone. It can be kept together only by the cementing force of Ikhwan There are no nationalities in Pakistan or, for that matter, anywhere else; and the idea of nationalities is subversive.”

The reason behind the denial of the existence of nationalities and the multination structure of Pakistan is the anxiety of the rulers to retain their hold over the country at any cost. But the acceptance of the presence of nationalities in a multi-national polity dose not mean the disintegration of the country which is truly formed and run by the nationalities. There are several pluralistic states which have nationalities and communities that possess nation-like characteristics, but do not have their separate states. The classic example of an adequately functioning multinational state is Switzerland where German, French and Italian nationalities enjoy the rights of nationalities within a single state and without the desire to form nationstates.

Afghanistan also admits the existence of several nationalities within its state borders. Even a country like Ethiopia in its constitution accepts the question of nationalities and their national right of self-determination. None of the states mentioned above is faced with a threat of disintegration. On account of its multi-national character. Strange as it may seem, the use of the term nationality has come to denote the preclusion of the right to selfdetermination.

Thus, when rights of a historical community or ethnic group are demanded on the basis of ‘nationality,’ it more or less means all the rights, except the right to self-determination. It may also be added here that even when the right to self-determination is demanded, it does not automatically mean the desire to secede. It may only mean the obtaining of guarantee against national oppression and exploitation.

The Balochs, Pashtoons and the Sindhis feel that they are living under the oppression of political establishment dominated by the Punjabis. They feel that the Punjabis, who dominate the army and the bureaucracy, have been denying them their due rights. The present style and ongoing policies of Islamabad towards the oppressed and subjugated nationalities of Pakistan will lead to another sever phase of instability within the country. The Balochs, Sindhis, Pashtoons and the Siraiki people are demanding the re-writing of constitution on the basis of equality and social justice.

Demand for rewriting the Constitution 

The continued reliance in Pakistan in its initial years on the Government of India act, 1935 provided an opportunity to the ruling elite of Pakistan to impose their unjust and unfair policies on the smaller nationalities. Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, wanted to become the powerful Governor General of the country, so he held the positions of the governor general, the president of Constitutional Assembly, and president of the Muslim League - all three. The Act of 1935 was amended, and by virtue of it, the Governor General dissolved the assembly of NWFP and later dismissed the chief minister of Sindh. The whole structure was again changed after his death that suited the new ruling elite. All the three constitutions of Pakistan failed to safeguard the political rights and autonomy of nationalities, and constitutions failed to check the military interventions of 1958,1969,1977, and 1998. As a result of military coups, two constitutions were abrogated and the third one was mutilated and put in abeyance. In all these cases of military interventions, the judiciary, which is mainly controlled by the Punjabi ethnic group justified the legality of the Punjabi dominated military governments on the basis of Doctrine of Necessity. The Supreme Court in these words legalized Zia’s coup: "Extraconstitutional step taken by the armed forces of Pakistan was justified by requirements of state necessity and welfare of the people." Former East Pakistan, presently Bangladesh, took the geographical advantage of distance from the capital of the country and from its western part and succeeded in getting rid of unjust rule of Punjabi civil and military bureaucracy. Rest of the nationalities like Baloch, Sindhi, Pashtoon and Siraiki are presently trying to convince the rulers of Pakistan to accept the right of nationalities and introduce a new social contract.

Pakistan Oppressed Nation's Movement (PONM), since 1998 has started a broad-based political and democratic campaign to convince the civil and military rulers to rewrite the constitution of Pakistan on the wishes and will of all nationalities to promote equality and social and political justice in the country. PONM, has demanded that a new liberal and democratic constitution based on the equality of nations be formulated according to the spirit of the 1940 Lahore Resolution to safeguard the very basic rights of nationalities and has demanded autonomy for all the provinces. "Under this constitution all provinces shall have total autonomy. All present functions of the federation with exception of defense, foreign affairs and currency shall be transferred to the provinces. Federal interference in matters of provincial rights and authorities shall end. This constitution shall also provide a foolproof guarantee to safeguard rights and authorities of provinces. Composition of the Pakistan Army should be recomposed, having equal representation of nations from all provinces so that it can effectively and practically be presented as the national army of Pakistan. Army should not be allowed to run the affairs of the country. They are responsible only to defend the geographical boundaries of the state,” The right to govern will be through a parliament composed of equality of nations, and directly elected by the people and accountable to them. The armed forces, including all its related institutions, shall be subservient to the elected parliament, so that Pakistan can become a true democratic and federally accepted state for the oppressed nationalities.

The principles on the basis of which the rewriting of the constitution will be done:

  • Pakistan is a multi-national, multi-lingual, multi-cultural, and multiethnic country.
  • All nationalities, ethnic groups should have equal rights and an equal opportunity to advance.
  • All languages and cultures should be declared and promoted as national languages and Urdu and English promoted as a medium of communication among the nationalities, and there should be mutual respect and tolerance for all languages.
  • Suppression of diversity in the name of national unity, or on any other pretext, not only amounts to violation of human rights, but is counterproductive to the aims of co-existence.
  • The right of self-determination of all nationalities should be accepted.
  • The question of re-demarcation of national units should be accepted on the basis of mutual consultations and all nationalities should be allowed to form their own national units on the basis of geography, history, ethnicity, culture and mutual deliberation. 

These principles assumes significance, if we keep note of the fact that, since the inception of Baloch nationalism, it has been confronted with international frontiers, which divided the Baloch people among three countries. The Baloch people have found their aspirations frustrated by national boundaries and central administration over their lands. The Baloch nationalism is not ready to accept the unjust decision of colonial Empire as Afghans do not recognize the Durand Line or Pakistan does not accept the, Line of Control in Kashmir. Balochistan, divided between Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan, was a compact unit. The total area of "Greater Balochistan" was approximately 340,000 square kilometers. Iran occupies about two hundred eighty thousand (280,000) sq miles. Approximately 350,000 sq miles (including the Baloch populated districts of Sindh and Punjab) is controlled by Pakistan and some sixty thousand sq miles (60, 000) area is under the control of Afghanistan given to them by British imperialists under Anglo-Afghan boundary commission agreement of 1896. Thus despite the size of its territory and relatively large population (currently between 12 to 15 million), the Baloch do not enjoy even limited political and cultural autonomy. The governments of Iran and Pakistan have always viewed the Baloch quest for self-rule as a threat to their territorial integrity and, therefore have joined hands to deal with the Baloch. In 1957, they assisted each other on a bilateral basis to suppress Dad Shah’s revolt and later the Balochistan Liberation Front’s movement in Iran in 1968. Till 1973-77 the government of Iran fully backed the aggression of Pakistan Army against the Baloch political movement. In April 1973 Prime Minister of Pakistan Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto met Shah of Iran in Tehran and received $200 million in emergency military assistance. Again in 1974, Iran dispatched thirty US-supplied Huey cobra helicopters, manned mostly by Iranian pilots to help the military aggression of against innocent Baloch people.

The first representative government of Balochistan in Pakistan was dissolved in February 1973, after nine months of its existence. A serious political crisis of legitimacy arose in the aftermath of dismissal of NAP government in Balochistan and the resignation of coalition government of Jamiat Ulemae-Islam in N.W.F.P. province. According to historians these were the precise moments when Baloch leadership concluded that the only way out for their rights was an armed struggle. The mistrust had grown so deep that all avenues of dialogue were closed down. Pakistan military went on offensive against the Baloch people in 1973. In September1974, army launched operation Chamalang against the Baloch Mari tribe. Pakistan army used both air force and military in this operation and approximates are that 1500 Baloch women and children were killed in this operation who failed to take refuge in the mountains. The following years between 1973-1975, over 180 major encounters were recorded between Baloch guerillas and army. Five thousand (5000) Balochs were killed while 3000 soldiers of armed forces of Pakistan lost their lives in the battle. Until 1978, there were six thousand political activists; students and politicians were in jails all over Pakistan. Emergence of Balochistan Liberation Army.

Today, people have developed serious grievances regarding the exploitative nature of the various economic projects such as, the exploration of oil and gas under various agreements. The people think that these projects would benefit only Punjab or others and its industrial interests and it will not bring any positive change in the lives of the Baloch people. The discontent is imminent in various forms of protests. Baloch nationalist leaders have objections to these projects as with regard to none of these the Baloch people were invited or consulted in the course of signing of MoUs and agreements between international companies and the government of Pakistan.

In Iran also, the highly centralized and Persian-dominated rulers deliberately ignored the ethno-linguistic and multi-national reality of the country. The non-Persian national groups were not recognized and accorded national rights. In the absence of constitutional guarantees and recognition of the national rights of non-Persians, the government translated its nation-building campaign into a set of integrationist policies and practices aimed at their economic integration and socio-cultural assimilation into Persian dominated state structure.

The process of tampering with the historical existence of the Baloch people is going on in Iran. The western province of Balochi speaking people was divided into three parts in 1958-59 and parts of it were included into Persian speaking province of Kerman. Such attempts are meant to reduce Baloch into minority in their own land.

Until 1809, Western Balochistan was under the control of Khan of Kalat. In 1871, with the help of Britain, Iran managed to divide Balochistan. According to M.G. Pikulin, a Russian scholar on Balochistan, the Baloch tribes revolted against the unnatural division and occupation by Iran. During the First World War, the British occupied Western Balochistan. In 1915 the leaders of the resistance movement were arrested by the British and sent to India. In 1916, mass anti-British demonstrations took place among the Baloch tribes. In spite of defeats, the resistance lasted until 1924, when joint British-Iranian forces put it down. In 1925, Raza Khan became the Raza Shah of Iran. He adopted a policy to crush nationalism in Iran. The Iranian regime under the Shah rule pursued a ruthless, hard line policy towards the Baloch designed to stifle any expression of Baloch identity. Publishing, and distributing and even possession of Balochi language literature was a criminal offense – one of the most resented aspects of the Teheran regime against the Baloch people.

The policy of dividing the Baloch and integrating them in Persian-speaking provinces has compelled more then 150,000 Baloch to leave their ancestral land where they were treated as virtual aliens. They had to migrate to Arab Sheik doms across the Persian Gulf. Dad Shah's struggle became the first attempt to flourish nationalist sentiments among the Baloch people both in Pakistan and Iran on a common concern "Greater Balochistan". In 1964, the exiled leadership of Iranian Baloch established "Balochistan Liberation Front". The front was by Iraq and PLO of Yasser Arafat. The BLF advocated that " the only way to liberate Balochistan is the armed struggle of the masses – the Baloch do not believe in the stage-by-stage pursuit of independence".

The Governments of Syria and Egypt granted quasi-diplomatic status to BLF in the 1965-66 as the representative of provisional Baloch government in exile. Later, Baghdad became the headquarters for intensified radio broadcastings and insurgent activity in Iranian Balochistan. In March 1975, Baghdad and Tehran signed a peace agreement in which Iran promised to stop its support of the Kurds in exchange for Iraq’s termination of help to the Baloch and the Khuzistan Arabs.

Like Iran and Pakistan, Afghanistan too is a multinational country comprising of Pashtoons, Tajiks, Hazaras, Turkmen, Uzbek, Baloch and several other ethnic groups. The Baloch population in Afghanistan is concentrated in the Southwestern part of the country adjoining Iranian and Pakistani Balochistan.

Unlike, Iran and Pakistan, Afghanistan has maintained close links with Balochi population by extending political and moral support to the Baloch nationalists, particularly those living in Pakistan. During the reign of Mohammed Zahir Shah, Afghanistan supported the Baloch and Pashtoon opposition against the imposition of one-unit plan for West Pakistan. Later, President Mohammed Daud, supported very categorically the movement against the Bhutto regime. This solidarity was reflected in numerous efforts to raise the question of nationalities at various international forums. In 1973, the Afghan ambassador to the UN, referred Balochistan and Pashtoonistan as "usurped land". In 1976, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto visited Kabul and in return President Daud came to Islamabad in August the same year. During this visit Bhutto and Daud reportedly reached a far-reaching agreement. Pakistan agreed to grant provincial autonomy to Balochistan and NWFP and in exchange Afghanistan would recognize Durand Line as a permanent border.

The Balochs lost the Afghan support when Pakistan backed Talibans came into power and withdrew all political and moral support to the Baloch national issue. Taliban regime shut down the Balochi radio service from Kabul and closed all Baloch refugee camps in Helmand and Khandar.

The strategic importance of Balochistan has significant implications in terms of national right to self-determination. Because of its strategic location in the Perso-Oman Gulf, with a 700 miles long seacoast, the area has been important to the trade of the West since the rise of imperialism. Its strategic importance provides an opportunity to the Balochs to deal with the big or superpowers in order to liberate the country.

In 1952 Maneck B. Pathawalla, Honorary Technical Advisor of the Pakistan Ministry of economic Affairs, published a monograph based on the materials secured from the government agencies discussing the potentialities of Balochistan.

  1. Of all the provinces of Pakistan, Balochistan has the highest potential of mineral deposits, including chromites, coal, and petroleum.
  2. Its long coastline has very rich fishing grounds and can repay the cost of its development, if again fresh water can be made available to the native population of Las Bela and Makuran, who are direct decedents of the ancient class of fishermen, called Ikhthyopagoi, by the Greek historians.
  3. Balochistna is the only province in Pakistan that can claim a certain number of potential hill-stations and health-resorts. An enormous tourists trade is likely to follow an extension of its lines of communication and particularly its airfields.
  4. Its population is very thin and its area is very extensive, thereby giving an immense scope for resettlement and stabilization of the population, particularly the refugees, in this lowest-density zone of Pakistan.

The leaders of oppressed nationalities maintain that the interest of the country should be kept in mind by giving nationalities the right to culture, language and traditions. The ruling elite of Pakistan is supporting the self determination movement in Kashmir but is not ready to listen the demand for provincial and regional autonomy within Pakistan.

In South Asia territorial conflicts, ethnic animosities, religious extremism and growing enmities make it imperative that South Asia must be reorganized so that the region can become peaceful and stable. We can propose four interim measures towards that;

  • There is an urgent need of confidence building measures between the state and subjugated nationalities. This confidence building approach may be achieved through principle of compensation.
  • The principle of co-existence should be accepted and adopted by the rulers at the center and the leadership of the nationalities.
  •  There is need of extra constitutional and international arrangements to secure and ensure the political, economic, cultural and regional autonomy of the disempowered nationalities.

All nationalities should be allowed to be governed by their own people within their political, cultural, historical and geographical identity. 

4. Current unrest

Rashed Rahman, a noted journalist and editor of the daily Frontier Post, presented an account of few recent incidents of bomb blast in and around Quetta city and attempted to contextualize those incidents in the background of the regrouping of rebel forces in Balochistan. He pointed out that the bomb blasts that shook four cities in 2002 and the rocket attacks on the Command and Staff College in Quetta and at Kohlu in the Marri tribal area pointed to the continuing violence that underlay the surface of normal life in Pakistan.

The nature of the comparatively low intensity explosives used in the bomb blasts, and the locations selected indicated a pattern. The objective appeared to have been not so much to cause maximum loss of life as to spread terror.

The authorities responded according to a tired script. The ubiquitous ‘foreign hand’ was conveniently trotted out as usual, although it must be admitted that the link between the December 22 Lashkar-e-Tayyaba attack on the Red Fort in Delhi and this coordinated series of bombings in Pakistan did appeal to logic. A high level committee was set up to probe the incidents.

The fact remained however, that saboteurs had been able to mount a sustained campaign of violence, which since 1987 has involved 233 blasts that took 535 lives and injured 3,000. In the year 2000 alone, the number of bomb blasts all over the country was at least 51. The casualties these blasts inflicted included at least 85 killed and 468 injured. Of these incidents though, 17 took place in and around Quetta, claiming 11 killed and 44 injured.

Admittedly, catching presumably trained saboteurs was no easy task. The bomb blasts all over the country, apart from Quetta, the most popular theory went, appeared to be part of the tit-for-tat covert war being waged by the Indian intelligence agency, RAW. This campaign was intended to raise the cost for Pakistan of its support for the struggle in Kashmir. It was this reasoning which made the linkage between the Red Fort incident and the recent bombings in Pakistan attractive.

Apart from the rejectionist Kashmiri groups, many of the others, including the largest, Hizbul Mujahideen, have not reacted in knee-jerk fashion to New Delhi’s ceasefire initiative. A window of opportunity seems to have opened up for exploring a peaceful resolution of the Kashmir conundrum.

However, complacency and/or failure to capitalise on it by any or all of the actors, could rapidly shut this window. This could make it much harder next time round to rehabilitate trust and confidence between the protagonists.

The present signs are more hopeful than they have been for many years, but the extreme fundamentalist groups and their backers amongst religious parties in Pakistan seem bent upon sabotaging the emerging peace process.

The case of the bomb blasts and rocket attacks in Quetta and elsewhere in Balochistan was different. The claimant of these actions, a hitherto unknown group calling itself the Balochistan Liberation Army was widely perceived to be composed of supporters of the incarcerated Marri Sardar, Khair Buksh Marri. He was in prison for a long time on the charge of being involved in the murder of a Balochistan High Court judge. The case was complicated because of internal political rifts in the Marri tribe, with the largest section, the Bijaranis, at loggerheads with the Sardar on a host of issues dating back to the guerrilla resistance in Balochistan of 1973-77.

The murdered judge belonged to the Bijarani section. Five sons of Khair Buksh Marri, also charged with the murder, had fled abroad. Khair Buksh’s bail application was turned down by both the Balochistan High Court as well as the Supreme Court. The investigating authorities, because of their ham-handed handling of the case, whereby they kept Khair Buksh in solitary confinement and attempted to interrogate him (without success, one might add) only on the years of guerrilla resistance, quite unrelated to the case in hand, have merely succeeded in giving a new lease of life to Khair Buksh’s political fortunes. Inside Balochistan itself, amongst nationalist elements, as well as in the human rights community throughout the country, sympathy has resurrected for Khair Buksh.

The Balochistan Liberation Army in its communiqué to newspapers and news agencies following the rocket attacks singled out the military as the enemy of Balochistan and reiterated its stance of not targeting civilians. Its actions might have been unrelated to the other bombing incidents, but its timing threw more fuel on the fire of exposing the incompetence of the security agencies.

It is a commonplace in political theory that force often is the midwife of an existing society pregnant with a new one. The violence of resistance is justified by aggrieved groups on the touchstone of the justness of their cause.

To maintain the image of a victim resisting injustice, such groups have to be careful not to strike out blindly and thereby forfeit the sympathy of the public at large. The Balochistan Liberation Army, whatever its credentials as a vehicle for giving voice to the long standing grievances of the people of Balochistan, appears to have imbibed this lesson. Hence its almost exclusive focus on administrative and military targets, with bombs being placed strategically so as not to cause civilian casualties. Unless the authorities handle the affair of Khair Buksh Marri with care and according to due process, they may end up fuelling another round of bitter conflict in Balochistan.

Mr. Naimatullah Gichki, a professional and a political activist, also contributed to the discussion in the same vein. He presented an account of the deep feeling among the Baloch population of being a separate entity. He went back to Pakistan Resolution adopted in March 1940 by the All India Muslim League in Lahore that was to provide the basis for a separate homeland for the Muslims of India. He said that the federation of Pakistan  comprised Sindh Panjab, NWFP, East Bengal and the Baloch territories.

Yet, successive regimes in Islamabad never honoured that reality. Pakistan was conceived as a federation, but ended in autocratic rule and unitary form of Government. People were continuously denied their democratic rights and repressive forces were unleashed on those who raised voice against autocracy. The Balochs were never accepted in the power structure and the attitude of the ruling group remained hostile towards national minorities who were never trusted as true Pakistanis.

As far as the question of autonomy and right to self-determination was concerned as a political solution to the problem, he said that Balochs wanted a political settlement of the national question in Pakistan. The present situation had pushed the Balochs to rethink their policy in the new world economic order, under which the multimillion investment plans of China and the United States would have serious consequences for the people of Balochistan in particular and for the region in general. For peace, development, human rights and justice, people's right to exercise their will must be honoured. And the solution lay in giving the Baloch true representation in decision making process through granting autonomy to the nationalities.

Ms. Naela Quadri, a political and women's rights activist while exploring the historical and political bases of the Baloch issue for self-determination from the point of peace politics human rights and justice, focused on the state of literacy, population, and development of the province in the recent years by pointing out that the population of Balochistan is 7.8 million and the literacy rate among men is 12.5% and in women is 2.9%. Balochistan is rich in oil, gas, gold and minerals. The original recoverable quantity of gas only in the fields of Sui and Pir Koh was estimated as 9.976 trillion of cubic feet (TCF). From 1953 up to July 01, 1988, 4.299 TCF has been consumed.

This gas is supplied to all big cities of Pakistan to run the industries in Sindh, Punjab and NWFP. She like other noted that nuclear development in South Asia had created many crucial problems for the economy and environment. The most cruel and inhuman side was the misuse of the lands of indigenous people and leaving them all alone to face the deadly consequences, in the wake of the nuclear explosion. It was ironic that while all the missile testing was supposed to be for defence against India, the missiles were test fired on Balochistan land.

Mr. Tahir Muhammad Khan, a human rights activist and lawyer, looked at the genesis of autonomy for Balochistan. He explained that the British came to Kalat in 1839 while returning from Afghanistan war. In the subsequent events, the British captured and obtained increasingly more and more political concessions. Mr. Khan surveyed the history and concluded that centralized state apparatus was the major reason for secessionist aspirations of the people. Mr. Khan also raised some issues which were intrinsic to the Baloch society and politics. He pointed out the internal rift that existed between Baloch and Pashtoon populations on a number of issues.

He was also very critical of the human rights situation among the tribes and in the tribal system. He linked these features with the undemocratic nature of local politics in which ordinary citizens had no say.

5. Other issues and views

In a note sent for discussion, Shah Noor Mengal looked at the growing geostrategic interest of world powers in the region. The increasing Chinese investment in Balochistan, particularly in the post September 11 scenario spoke of Chinese interests in the region. For the Balochs these interests entails long term consequences for the people of Balochistan who did not have a say in the whole process of negotiation between the government of Pakistan and China. The construction of deep-sea port at Gowader and the building a network of roads in Balochistan with Chinese investment raised serious questions in the minds of Balochs. They were also scared of ever growing interest of the United States of America in the region that according to the Baloch leadership could turn Balochistan into a battlefield of world powers to achieve their strategic and economic gains. He noted that China’s growing interest in Balochistan had raised many eyebrows and created suspicions regarding Chinese political and economic motives in developing Gwadar sea-port and engaging itself in Sandak copper-gold mines project.

The Chinese interests had triggered a series of counter measures by the interested quarters and Balochistan had now become the focus of attention as a possible route for world trade, facilitating transmission of central Asian oil and gas through Baloch waters. The visit to Pakistan by the Chinese Premier Mr. Zhu Rongji in 2001 had brought another round of economic cooperation between the two countries.

They had signed six agreements and one memorandum of understanding (MoU) on May 11, 2001. According to these agreements China would provide a grant of 50 million Yuan for promotion of economic and technical cooperation between the two countries. Chinese Minister for Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation, Shi Guangsheng and Finance Minister, Shaukat Aziz signed the agreement which provided among others 10 year lease to Metallurgical Construction Corporation of China (MCCC) of Saindak Copper-Gold Project. The point to note was that the Chinese assistance came  at a time when Pakistan was facing serious financial crisis. The details reveal that China would extend assistance for projects worth over one billion dollars including provision of $200 million supplier’s credit for the modernization of Pakistan Railways, $100 million for providing new equipment to Paksitan Telecommunicaiton Limited and $120 million for the oil pipeline project.

Another $240 million was expected for development of Gwadar port and $200 million for coastal highway project. China would also invest $40 million in the Saindak copper-gold mine project which was to be constructed by the Chinese. It needed operational funding worth RS. 1.5 billion which the government was unable to provide, thus leaving this mega project in shambles.

The high profile investment by the Chinese in Balochistan had raised some questions. The area which was portrayed as desolate and difficult to be developed by Pakistan leadership had now attracted the Chinese. This had not only sparked a rivalry among world economic powers but had focused also on huge untapped resources of region and geo-strategic location of the province.

Certain sections of Baloch opinion were against exploring their wealth, which they claimed, would be used only for the benefit of others. Some powerful tribal leaders were also resisting tapping resources without firm guarantees that the revenues so received would be spent on the uplift of the people of Balochistan. Recent attacks on Chinese engineers working on a project in Balochistan, and that too at such a time when the Chinese Prime Minister’s visit had been scheduled, told much of the story.

In the context of all these, Mr. Mengal also stressed on just distribution of resources and wealth of the country and the participation of Baloch people in decision-making process.

Dr. Naseer Dashti analysis of formation of a nation and the process of nation state building was very informative and enlightening. His note surveyed different phases of history where people had successfully achieved and preserved their unique identity, culture and history. The less successful cases also came in discussion in his analysis of nation building where people had not been able to safeguard their distinct cultures.

According to Naseer Dashti, there were more nations or potential nations than existing states. Many nations aspired to attain statehood yet had not and might not attain it in the near future like the Balochs in West Asia and Kashmiris in South Asia, the Kurds in the Middle East, the Tamils in Sri Lanka, Québecs in Canada and Irish in Britain.

He drew attention in the perspective to the fact that the national minorities in Pakistan were aspiring for acceptance as national entities. The State of Pakistan's claim to be a federation had yet to acknowledge these peoples as geographic, racial and cultural identities. Their homelands had been demarcated and maintained as administrative units and not as geographical and historical entities uniting to form the federation of the country. India was pursuing similar policies towards many national groups within the union.

In Iraq, Iran and Turkey, Kurds had their historical, cultural and geographical entity. A large chunk of Kurdish country was merged into Iraq with the British help without any considerations to Kurdish feelings. A portion remained with Turkey. Iran also had its share of Kurdish land. Thus, Kurds were now divided within three territorial states. Same approach had been and is being adopted by Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan regarding aspiration of Baloch people for their national sovereignty.

He said that languages had characteristics that fit into the nationalistic notions of states and nationalities. Language was undoubtedly the main carrier of ideas, sentiments, traditions, customs and religious dogma from one generation to another. In their assimilation efforts, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan had not allowed Balochi to be the language of instructions in schools even at primary level. Balochi publications and institutions for academic research were never encouraged. In Iran, such institutions were not allowed to function. In the University of Balochistan in Quetta, Balochi language was taught at Masters Level but not in primary schools or basic educational institutions. This is the unique case in educational history anywhere.

The dominant nationality in Pakistan had manipulated print and electronic media, and state institutions. Intelligence services became crucial for media management and approaches aimed at so-called ‘assimilation and integration’ of Balochs in the misconceived nation of Pakistan. Nevertheless, in the prevailing international political atmosphere the states cannot solely depend on religion or any other identity as the sole binding force for uniting different ethnic or national entities. Recognition of the national aspirations of minority nationalities in the federation of Pakistan and due consideration to their cultural, linguistic, economic and political rights is imperative in order to lessen the sense of deep alienations prevailing among the masses of these nationalities.

In multi-ethnic countries, the ascendancy to power by one specific ethnic group over another tended to occur through the minimization of political and economic opportunities of other group. It was generally argued that scientific and cultural closeness might paves the way to an affinity of sociocultural traits that will ultimately prove to be a check on extreme national urges among the nations or ethnic groups within a territorial state.

Nevertheless, national appeal or ethnicity never depended on such affinity. Cultural and national differences will persist in spite of inter-ethnic contacts and dependence. Kurds in Iran were not a community altogether segregated from other Iranians but this has never proved strong enough for them to renounce their claim for separate nationhood. The majority of Balochs had been part of Pakistan for more than five decades. Its youth were getting education in its schools and universities with syllabi evolved by Pakistani authorities with strong arguments for Pakistani nationalism. However, the sense of national identity was stronger among the educated youth than in other sections of the population. Quebecois, Basques, Irish and Tamils, Kashmiris were not isolated entities nor did they reject cultural influences from other groups within their respective territorial states, but their demand for national self-rule was overwhelming.

Nationalism is a state of collective mentality, which represents the people's political will aimed at achieving a state where it can live for the good of all its members. Territorial or multi-national states are facing tremendous problems within from the contending nationalities for identity and recognition and for sovereign status of their own. The subjugated nations consider present political boundaries unsatisfactory and inappropriate for their national requirements. Self-determination is being favored as a universal principle for the solution of political issues. The principle of national self-determination will change the entire political and geographical landscape of the globe. It may not be acceptable to many, but it clearly involves an unavoidable principle. In order to grant the right of national self-determination to oppressed nationalities the entire world political map especially that of Asia, has to be reshaped and remodeled.

Section 3

The Audit Exercise having discussed the historical-political-social nature of the Baloch national question, and having taken note of the colonial origins of the issue, the post-colonial continuity of the same, and the state of the divided Baloch people today in three countries and more sub-regions, recommends that:

  1. Resolution on the Baloch National Question and Federal Solution

1) The Baloch national question will have to be addressed in its totality so that the basic rights and identity of the Baloch as a people are safeguarded in the entire region, and the issue is resolved amicably ensuring regional peace and stability.

2) Federalism had never been given a fair chance in Pakistan to resolve the Baloch national question. Elected, civilian, and military rulers have personified their misrule. There is a need to address the national question in a constitutional way by using peaceful means. The issue can be taken up with the mutual consent of other nations and peoples of Pakistan towards rebuilding the political-legal structure for the country with all nations and peoples enjoying equal rights and representation at all level.

3) Pakistan should be declared a multi-national federal state, which comprises distinct peoples with distinct cultures, languages, and geographical and historical backgrounds.

4) The Baloch national question is an issue of regional peace, which calls for recognition of the essential elements of justice. Gross violations of human rights happen in acute conflict conditions as has happened in Balochistan. Regional peace can be preserved only when legitimate rights of the Baloch people and other peoples are protected and conflicts are resolved peacefully.

5) The right of Baloch people to own resources of their land has to be recognised and the other peoples should also be given the same right. Exploitation of other's resources is impermissible and a violation of basic rights of the people. The right to access over own resources is to be combined with principles of interdependence and need for help to the backward and deprived peoples.

6) A Truth Commission comprising eminent jurists, academics and representatives of the civil society has to be formed to find out the truth about the sufferings to the Baloch people in the past 54 years, so that responsibility for the same can be determined towards restoration of justice and dignity.

7) The establishment of a truth commission can work when the nations and peoples of Pakistan enter into a new social contract renewing trust on each other and begin journey towards new federalism enriched with new forms of autonomy and new notions of shared sovereignty.

8) Towards establishing such new federalism there is a need for a re-demarcation of internal territorial boundaries between the provinces based on deliberations among different nations and peoples, voluntary consent of affected people, contiguity, and history. Such re-demarcation must be accompanied by guarantees of the rights of national, ethnic, racial, and other minorities.

9) After re-demarcation of national boundaries, the Baloch people will have to defend the rights of the cultural and religious minorities in all circumstances giving them equal rights in all spheres of human activities.

10) The spirit of new federalism will draw from some of the ideals of a con-federal association, shared sovereignty, and the above-mentioned need for a new social contract.

11) Balochi language should be adopted as a medium of instructions and education beginning at the elementary level of education initially.

12) The Baloch national question will have to be viewed and analyzed in the broader perspective of a divided people, which will need forms of unions such as the Sami parliament and other such arrangements that combine state existence with inter-union of people spread over more than one country.

13) Free movement of Baloch people within the boundaries of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan should be guaranteed with facilities for travel, trade and cultural exchanges for promoting understanding among different segments of Baloch people in the region.

2. Resolution on the Historical and Political Basis of the Baloch Quest for Autonomy And Self-determination from the point of Peace, Human Rights and Social Justice

1) Where there is political deprivation, issues of violations of human rights, peace and social justice become vital for social and political discourse. The Baloch question of autonomy has been prominent and has been raised by Baloch leaders and intellectuals as political issue and has been a cause of many repressive actions by the State against the Baloch people.

2) Balochistan means the eastern and Southeastern part of Iran from Dasht e Lut in the west to the lower half of the Indus valley in Pakistan, including the Southwestern part of Afghanistan. Its total area is approximately 340000sq. miles and its population is estimated to 20 million. Geographically Balochistan is a part of the Iranian plateau and culturally it forms part of Southwest Asia, also the area where South Asia ends.

3) The Baloch resisted against Iranian attempts to domination up to 1928 when Raza Shah of Iran subdued them with British support. The eastern part of Balochistan was further divided into British Balochistan, Balochistan states, while a part of Siestan was given over as lease.

4) At the end of the nineteenth century, in greater imperial interests the British negotiated with the Afghan government and decided to draw the Durand line and Goldsmith line which resulted in dividing Blaoch homeland in three parts. And, in the name of administrative purpose, huge tracts of land from Balochistan were annexed to the provinces of Punjab and Sindh under British control.

5) The land and the people of Balochistan have a distinct national, cultural and political and administrative entity and identity from centuries. By the beginning of the twentieth century territorial changes occurred in this area. Political maps of the world have changed repeatedly to serve the interests of the imperial hegemonic powers. Wars, revolutions, and political movements have brought major shifts in human population and values of various cultures and societies.

6) Many countries have divided and re-divided and new states have emerged as independent states. Borders have run through cultural and linguistic entities. And thus the national issue of Balochistan was left unresolved. The area of Derjat and Khangarh (Jacobabad) were demarcated and given to British India.

7) Early 20th century when the movement for independence in the Indian subcontinent gathered momentum, the Baloch people also asserted their political and geographical identity. The people of Balochistan under the auspices of Kalat National Party started a movement for their democratic rights. During this period conferences were held highlighting Baloch identity, and the inspiration to sovereignty. In March 1940, the Lahore resolution was passed by the All India Muslim league which clearly declared that the new potential state of Pakistan would be a federation. At that time Balochistan was an independent state (Kalat State Union), having a bicameral assembly. The issue of annexation was debated and rejected by both the houses of Balochistan parliament. However, a year later after the creation of Pakistan the annexation was forced on the State of Kalat by Pakistan. That created a wave of resentment and political unrest, which resulted into an armed revolt and had to be quelled by coercion.

8) In 1920, Mir Abdul Aziz Kurd and Mir Yousuf Ali Khan Magsi initiated a political movement, Anjuman e Ittehad Balochistan (Organization for the unity of Baloch and Balochistan). In 1931 Kalat State National Party was formed by Mir Ghous Bux Bizanjo, the aim of these attempts was to secure United Balochistan.

9) The first Baloch national conference was held in 1932 to shape the future contours of Baloch nationalist agenda which continues till today. The movement has seen various ups and downs in the last hundred years. Political movements of the people have been going on in form of various demands for self-determination and autonomy.

10) On August 11 1947, before the independence of India and Pakistan Balochistan’s Independence was announced by British.

11) On March 27, 1948, Balochistan was annexed by force in Pakistan. Mr. Ghous Bux Bizanjo, Mir Abdul Aziz Kurd and several other political leaders were jailed or placed under house arrest or exiled. On May 1948, Agha Karim Khan, the governor of Makran, launched a rebellion against Pakistan and went to mountains with numerous members of the National Party.

12) The newly created state of Pakistan did not honour its resolve to achieve a true and genuine federal political arrangement. The political and administrative structure was highly centralized.

The rights of smaller groups and federating units were denied by the Punjabi ruling clique. Pakistan's ruling elite treated all nationalist movements, particularly Baloch nationalist struggle, as a threat to the state and the so-called ‘national security’. The establishment reacted to all political movements with strong oppressive measures.

13) Baloch struggled for political recognition has continued till now in different forms and strategies that have included constitutional struggles also. Unfortunately the constitutional attempts have remained unsuccessful – one instance being the first elected Baloch nationalist government in Pakistan, headed by Sardar Ataulla Mengal, which was forcibly dissolved by the Federal Government eight months after its establishment, with majority of the members of assembly being put behind bars. Two elected provincial governments in Balochistan were broken by power and conspiracy.

14) Balochistan has gone through four armed conflicts since 1948.

The discrimination against Balochistan in term of resource allocation, government services, education, and development of basic infrastructure has been conspicuous from the beginning.

15) One hundred years of continued human rights violation and oppression has reduced the indigenous Baloch population into a ‘minority’. The people of Balochistan see the recent development projects as another threat to their livelihood and political aspirations. It is feared that these projects will result into greater displacement of Baloch people and an inward migration of others, which will be again a blow to the demography of Balochistan. The nuclear blasts and defense programs of Pakistan have made the people poorer and more vulnerable.

16) The present traditional Baloch society has a number of inherited structural discriminations. The hierarchy of tribe, caste, clan and patriarchy is reflected in various forms of oppression within the society at various levels. The colonial system provided full support to the tribal ruling class and strengthened and contributed to the perpetuation of tribalism. The ruling elite of Pakistan and Iran have also joined hands with the tribal ruling class to continue the system based on undemocratic values.

17) The worst form of discrimination and violation of rights can be witnessed against women in present Baloch society. The patriarchy is so strong that women are being killed in the name of honor and treated as third class citizens. Their mobility is extremely restricted which has resulted in marginalization of women at all levels of society including their access to information, education, resources and to the decision making institutions. Women’s participation and representation is also negligible in all spheres of state and society.

18) The notion of peace in the present Baloch context is intriguing.

The grievances of the ordinary citizens of Balochistan remain un-addressed. The post 1977 situation has worsened the plight of people. This is a continuous phase of human rights violations, which include torture and extra judicial killings. Nuclear tests and missile tests in Balochistan have created health sufferings, drought, displacements and rising insecurities. The neighboring Shia fundamentalism in Iran and Sunni fundamentalism in Punjab are threatening the traditional secular society of Baloch where Hindus, Christians, Zikris and Sunnis had lived for long in relative peace. In the structure of decision-making, the Baloch has no representation, so development and all related policies are against the existence of Baloch people.

3. Resolution on the Current State of the Nationality Question

1) The term "nationality" implies a group within a state, which may seek the right of self-determination. Though that particular nationality can uphold the right to secession and the formation of an independent state, it does not imply that it necessarily has to seek only that solution in gaining political recognition and self-determination. Autonomy with guarantees for provincial and national rights may satisfy a particular nationality’s aspiration.

2) In South Asia, the question of nationalities has asserted itself in the post-colonial multinational states. Dominant nationalities in these states have not accorded fair and just treatment to their minorities or their deprived and marginalized nationalities – a situation that has given rise to movements for national rights.

To resolve these nationality issues, and achieve inter-state and intra-state peace, development and progress in South Asia, it is necessary to take concrete measures to satisfy the national aspirations of all nationalities in a democratic manner.

3) Pakistan, being a multinational state in which this reality has not been recognized, has seen enormous conflict in its relatively short history. In the case of East Pakistan this resulted in its separation, whereas Balochistan, Sindh and NWFP in the course of this period have experienced at different times and in varying degrees, similar oppression.

4) In the context of Balochistan, the people having been through enormous, costly struggles for national rights, including armed resistance against central government’s oppression in the last 54 years, desire peace and just political recognition. Such recognition can come only through genuine autonomy within a restructured, federal, democratic state of Pakistan. Any arrangement for autonomy must offer guarantees for the following national rights of the people of Balochistan.

  • Freedom to elect all their representatives at provincial and national level.
  • Access to and control of their own resources with priority being given to the development of these resources for the benefit of the people of Balochistan.
  • Constitutional safeguards at the federal level against encroachments on the national and provincial rights and the autonomy of Balochistan.
  • Guarantees for the rights of the minorities within Balochistan rights within the framework of provincial autonomy; also guarantees for rights of women.
  • Adjustments and re-demarcation of provincial boundaries on the basis of consensus and on the basis of the criterion of geographical, historical, and cultural contiguity – the consensus must take note also of the wishes of the people inhabiting in the area to be affected by re-demarcation.

 

South Asia Forum for Human Rights (SAFHR)

Human rights, peace and democracy are the main areas of concern of the South Asia Forum for Human Rights. SAFHR's programmes promote respect for the universal values of human rights, the interdependence of rights and the indivisibility of rights. In the strife torn region of south Asia, SAFHR is committed to promote these values through a new culture of dialogue – a dialogue which is not concerned with the culture of 'national security' but with the culture of peace, tolerance and coexistence. 

"Peace as a value" is the vision which informs SAFHR's regional dialogues.

Peace is not the absence of war of a management of crisis but an absolute value to be fundamentally integrated in the approach to realising a peoples' security. The notion of peace is as a space for the enjoyment of rights of all peoples. Without peace there can be no rights.

SAFHR's dialogues seek to redefine security in terms of peoples' security, that is, security of food, shelter, health and livelihood in a non-hegemonic democratic regional order. SAFHR's regional dialogues have addressed some of the core concerns of the human rights agenda - women, refugees, migrants, impunity, minorities, intolerence, inter-state and intra-state conflicts, militarisation and lack of regional cooperation. The objective is to link these issues in a framework of human rights, peace, tolerance, governance and decocracy.

SAFHR's programmes reach out to civil society groups, academicians, journalists, professionals and policy makers to build solidarities to promote a culture of peace through a network of 35 partners. 

SAFHR's paper series is part of the programme to develop a culture of peace and human rights through research, publications, education and people to people dialogue.

SAFHR Paper Series 

  1. Girl Trafficking in Nepal: An Overview 1997
  2. The Mahakali Integrated Development
  1. Treaty: An Evaluation of News Coverage 1997
  2. Refugees in South Asia: A Report 1998
  3. "Those Accords" A Bunch of Documents 1999
  4. Peace Process in Nagaland and Chittagong Hill Tracts – Peace Audit Report - 1 1999
  5. Protection of Refugees in South Asia: Need for Legal Framework 2000
  6. Ten Week War in Kargil From the News Files 2000
  7. Peace Process in Sri Lanka (Peace Audit Report II) 2001
  8. Reporting Conflict: A Radical Critique of the Mass Media by Indian & Pakistani Journalists 2001
  9. A Complex Denial: Disappearances, Secret Cremations & The Issue of Truth and
  10. Justice in Punjab 2001
  11. Revisiting the Constitution of a Hindu Public: Militarized Hindu Nationalism and the Mass Media 2002
  12. Three Essays on Law Responsibility and Justice 2002
  13. The Current History of Peace Politics 2002
  14. Chronicles of a No-Where People 2003 On the Indo-Bangladesh Border
  15. Insurgency & Displacement 2003