ISLAMABAD, 7 August 2004 — With federal government-Balochistan tension rapidly mounting the federal government needs to take definitive and immediate action to defuse the tension. No follow-up to either Prime Minister Chaudary Shujaat’s telephone conversation with Nawab Bugti or to President Musharraf’s recent agreement that Muslim League open dialogue with Baloch nationalist leaders has yet taken place.
The government’s mishandling of the basic question, whether the military operation is being conducted or not, itself is indicative of the way the government functions. On Aug. 1 the Inter Services Public Relations spokesman acknowledged that a military operation was under way.
He emphatically justified the operation in a BBC program, claiming, “It is against those who want to disturb law and order situation in the country.”
Interestingly only 48 hours later on Aug. 3 the interior minister emphatically denying that a military operation was underway in Balochistan said: “That is absolutely wrong. An unfounded propaganda is being aired by some vested interests.”
In the last ten days, in addition to several deaths in army-civilian clashes, Balochistan has experienced two major acts of violence. On Aug. 1 five off duty soldiers were killed when some men opened fire on their vehicle. These men have just left the heavily guarded military containment in Khuzdar. On Aug. 2 an assassination attempt on Balochistan chief minister left two men dead. The chief minister survived. The army called the killing of soldiers an “act of terrorism.”
Three quick responses from the Balochistan political scene justified the killing of soldiers. First a spokesman of a little known Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) claimed that the killings were to protest the army’s operation “against innocent people of Turbat and the construction of new military cantonment.” The second justification for the killing came from Secretary-General of Balochistan National Party (BNP) and former Sen. Habib Jalib. He told BBC, “they are terming it as terrorist incident but I do not agree with it.... I think the Pakistan government does not recognize national political and economic sovereignty of the people...”
When the BBC compeer questioned the BNP leader if use of violence was justified to resolve issues of political nature, his response was, “we have told the government of Pakistan that we believe in peaceful democratic national struggle and that issues should be resolved through these ways and means but the government does not want to consider our stance. The government wants to resolve the problem with use of force.”
The third justification came from Nawab Akber Khan Bugti, the chief of the Jamhuri Watan Party (JWP). In his Aug. 1 interview to BBC, Bugti explaining why Balochistan seemed to be in the grip of violence said: “The government has launched military operation in Makran particularly in Turbat and Gwader areas.” Bugti demanded, “People should be given their rights, particularly provincial autonomy.”
Currently Balochis are reportedly resenting plans to construct army cantonments in three districts. Locals have also complained that affluent and influential non-Balochi civilians and noncivilians have marginalized Balochis as financial beneficiaries of the multibillion-dollar Gwador port and city project.
These justifications for violence in Balochistan are not uncommon. Given especially the history and also the current nature of relationship between the centre and the vocal and powerful tribal and political leaders.
Hence, instant recall, in these times of center-Balochistan tension, by the Balochis of the 1973-army and air force operation in Balochistan, should come as no surprise.
The underdevelopment of human capital, infrastructure including absence of basic amenities like clean drinking water, health and education has lad the Balochis to complain against the “big brother” Punjab. Woven into this resentment has been a degree of political anger and bitterness toward the army also.
Political power in Balochistan now cuts four ways, the Baloch sardars, the Baloch nationalist Parties, national parties like PPP and the religious parties.
Baloch leaders are occupying public space, they are stating facts and maybe fiction too, as politicians they are extrapolating from “facts” a Baloch chronicle which underscores the unfairness toward the Balochis; by the army and Punjab-dominated centre. Historical facts, national development figures and struggling peoples’ stories from Balochistan do not completely refute the chronicle.
The politicians’ voice will carry more weight. Not those justifying use of force to establish “law and order.” Rule of law must be established, development must continue and security setups must be located. But none of this can successfully proceed without politics, without compromises and adjustments between state compulsions, political interests and people’s welfare.
Indeed what the government must not do is to go on the military and political offensive to neutralize the brewing crisis. Threats, warnings, ultimatums and maximalist positions will only worsen the situation. It could push either side “against the wall” decreasing possibility of an amicable settlement of genuine grievances.
We could then be headed toward greater difficulty; dovetailing into other unresolved challenges of politics, security and democracy. The center and the Muslim League must start a genuine dialogue with the political men of Balochistan, replacing its dominantly force-induced response to the deteriorating politico-security situation in Balochistan.
— Nasim Zehra is an Islamabad-based security analyst and fellow of the Harvard University Asia Center.
