Bombers, borders and Balochistan: op-ed in The News, July 30

By Kamila Hyat
We are all accustomed to the many words of wisdom delivered periodically by our interior minister. His recent orders banning ‘anti-government’ emails and SMS texts inspired acts of great public creativity, as the surge of messages and jokes sent out across the country grew in number. The primary targets did not change.

But sometimes the comments made by our ministers leave one aghast. The assurance that the establishment of ‘check-posts’ on the Balochistan-Afghanistan border would bring ‘good news’ from that province is among these remarks. Despite the recent capture of an alleged Baloch suicide bomber who stated he had been trained in Afghanistan and insinuations that insurgency in the province is linked to Indian intervention backed by Kabul, most of us know the problem simmers on within Balochistan itself. It is perfectly possible the Indians and their allies in Afghanistan have played some part in stirring the bubbling cauldron and keeping it simmering. The arms that flood Balochistan have after all come from somewhere. New Delhi we know is perfectly capable of seeking to destabilise its neighbour. But the ‘outside’ elements involved in Balochistan use the tensions that exist in the region to further their purposes. If we are to solve the issues of our largest province, this is a reality we must squarely face up to. Shying away from it will only add to the difficulties we confront as a federation and as a nation made up of people from many diverse cultures.

Over the past two months, six eminent academics have died in Balochistan. The victims appear to have been targeted on the basis of their ethnicity. Some had lived in the province for years. This of course is extremely bad news. There is immense potential for inter-communal strife in Balochistan. Pre-dominantly Pakhtun orthodox groups, some of whom have links to the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan have already been using this card to rally support among the large number of non-Baloch settlers. Handbills call for ‘Islam to be defended’ against ‘infidels’. There are insinuations that the Baloch are ‘bad’ Muslims and ‘bad’ citizens. Other racial slurs circulate widely, with echoes picked up too in other provinces. The potential then for still more instability in the country’s most troubled province is immense. There has as yet been no meaningful effort to dampen the fires. The conference involving all Baloch parties that the prime minister had promised to convene has, oddly, not been called. The continued blockage of Baloch nationalist websites means such groups are denied even the basic right to be heard and to make their views known. The Senate has been told Baloch nationalists will not be involved in any process of talks. This of course means less possibility of a solution and a greater likelihood that the intense rage in Balochistan will not be quietened.

The extent of the feelings that exist is now not hidden. Nationalist leader Hyrbyair Marri has said in London that he does not recognise Pakistan, Brahamdagh Bugti, the fiery grandson of the late Nawab Akbar Bugti, has used still stronger language and former chief minister Akhtar Mengal has scoffed at the notion of provincial autonomy, insisting that this will not now be enough. These words hurt ‘patriots’; perhaps they incite immense fury in some places. But we need to keep our calm, to reassess what we mean by patriotism and whether a federation within which so much angst exists can be indefinitely held together. It is in the interests of Pakistan – and the Baloch – to create more harmony between the units that make up the state. This can happen only by bringing the nationalists into the process of dialogue and accepting that their views are backed by people across the province. It is for this reason foolhardy to ignore the nationalists. The fact is that in homes, faded pin-ups of ‘heroes’ such as slain nationalist fighters decorate walls or appear unexpectedly atop washing machines and refrigerator doors. The people who have placed them there, the ordinary citizens who passionately believe their province has been discriminated against, need to be won over and somehow persuaded that they can play a meaningful role in a unified state.

It has been argued Balochistan cannot on its own survive. This may be accurate and there are also statistics which bring into question the number of ethnic Balochis in their home territory. The old bogey of East Pakistan and the ethnic hatreds that flared up there have been raised in the senate. Good advice on the need to talk to all groups there has also been given in the Upper House. But there is as yet no evidence that it will be taken or strategy altered. Sometimes one wonders who is calling the shots in Balochistan. Both the president and the prime minister have suggested sensible measures to solve the problems. It is a mystery why there has been no attempt to follow up on these; why missing people have not been tracked down or major dissident forces asked to sit around a table and discuss the issues that exist.

There are compelling reasons why this should happen. The unrest in Balochistan opens up doors and corridors that can be used to interfere in what is happening. India and Afghanistan have been identified as culprits, and with possible reason. But the US too has its eyes on this part of the world. Some think tanks have proposed a break-up of the region as a means to ‘tame’ both Iran and Pakistan. This may not happen immediately. But a US role in Balochistan and some kind of tie-in with nationalists is not a possibility that can be completely disregarded. It is something we need to be wary of. The best counter-strategy against any moves from outside quarters, no matter where they may be based, is of course to dampen the resentments in Balochistan.

If this were not reason enough to do more than setting up barricades at the borders, we need to keep tracks too on the Taliban threat. The extent of the dangers this poses have been highlighted by the fiery battles in Swat and other places. There is still no accurate assessment of the death and destruction that has resulted. There is a risk that we may yet see further conflict, focused in Waziristan. Acting against nationalists in Balochistan – many of whom espouse secular values – could open up space for the Taliban. They have already demonstrated they have a base in the province. Gatherings of their leaders have taken place openly even in Quetta.

This looming threat makes it all the more imperative that Balochistan be calmed. The only way to do this is to engage all players in an open discussion. A failure to do this may not result in the break-up of the federation; the state of Pakistan will almost undoubtedly be able to hang on to Balochistan, if necessary through force. But we must ask if the energy and effort necessary to do this weakens the nation in the longer run and adds to the many problems it already faces on far too many fronts. http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=190512