Shibdas Bhattacharjee
Since the controversial Indo-Pakistan joint statement, the Balochistan issue has once again acquired a new resonance. Rumour of a mysterious dossier containing evidence of Indian involvement in the Baloch insurgency has attracted the attention of political parties in India, although the government of India has denied the existence of both the dossier and putative support for the insurgent outfits active in Balochistan. But Islamabad was quick to equate Balochistan and Kashmir despite the fact that it treats Balochistan mostly from the point of view of resource extraction.
Pakistan, on July 24, made fresh allegations about India’s involvement in terrorist activities in that country, with Interior Minister Rehman Malik telling National Assembly that Indian intelligence agencies were running training camps in Afghanistan to foment unrest in Balochistan. Malik said that terrorist training camps in Afghanistan were training Baloch youths to create disturbance in the southwestern province. He claimed that these camps were being run by Indian intelligence agencies. The Interior Minister also said that Islamabad had informed New Delhi about the training camps after getting “strong evidence” from Pakistani intelligence agencies. He said Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani too had raised the issue of India’s alleged involvement in Balochistan with his counterpart Manmohan Singh during a recent meeting in Egypt. As was expected, aiming to stem the controversy over the inclusion of Balochistan in the India-Pakistan joint statement, Home Minister P Chidambaram has asserted that New Delhi has “nothing to do with Pakistan’s internal affairs”.
In fact, since January 2005, Pakistan’s Baluchistan province has been embroiled in a rash of violence that threatens to deteriorate into civil war. But violence in Baluchistan historically has been the product of several factors: a fiercely independent Baluch people that eschew outside interference; the lasting legacy of British policy; mismanagement by ruling Pakistani regimes; and historical grievances that have allowed Baluch leaders to mobilize support for their nationalist cause. The most recent surge of violence in Baluchistan is a result of a change in the relationship between the central government and Baluchistan brought about by the province’s growing strategic significance. While the United States currently views the conflict in Baluchistan as an internal matter, growing violence and continued instability in a region where the presence of the Taliban and Al Qaeda is widespread makes this a crisis worthy of US attention. Human rights organizations have also called upon the United Nations to raise the issue of enforced disappearance in Pakistan at the 10th session of the Human Rights Council (Geneva, March 2-27, 2009) to follow up on Pakistan’s previous pledge to begin to resolve the issue.
Despite several promises to resolve the country’s crisis of “disappearance’’, Pakistan’s new civilian government has not yet provided information on hundreds of cases of people believed to be held secretly by the government as part of the so-called war on terror, or in response to internal opposition. On several occasions in the past, Amnesty International has asked the government to come clear on this issue. In 2008, the organization used official court records and affidavits of victims and witnesses of enforced disappearances to show how government officials, especially from the country’s security and intelligences agencies, were resorting to a variety of tactics to conceal enforced disappearance. These include denial of detention having taken place and of all knowledge of the fate and whereabouts of “disappeared” persons; refusing to obey judicial orders; and concealing the identity of the detaining authorities.
Baluchistan has a history of insurgency with local groups advocating greater autonomy. Four waves of violent unrest took place in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77. Local people in Baluchistan are demanding a bigger share of the revenue generated by the province’s natural resources, principally natural gas, which they believe now benefit other provinces. A number of Baluchi groups are seeking more rights for the province. Some of these groups have resorted to violence, while others are campaigning peacefully. The Pakistan government has attempted to suppress this opposition by increasing military presence in the region. The confrontation between Baluch nationalists and the state is characterized by human rights abuses committed by all sides. But Islamabad has been actively blocking information in its efforts to cover up the indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force and the lack of accountability of security agencies operating in Balochistan. Nevertheless, news has been gradually trickling in. Indeed, the successive regimes in Pakistan and their political proxies have repeatedly sought to lay the blame on ‘hidden hand’ and ‘external actors’ — with India and the US recurring in the statements of the radical forces active in that country.
The separatist movement in Balochistan brings to the fore the social set-up of Pakistan and failure of the country to evolve as a true nation. As hundreds and thousands of people displaced by the military operation in Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province as well as Balochistan desperately seek food and shelter in other parts of the country, the unfolding humanitarian crisis brings out the country’s ethnic faultlines. The MQM, which raised the spectre of the “Talibanization” of Pakistani society several months ago, had already demanded an end to the flow of Baluch migration, alleging that Taliban terrorists were using this method to infiltrate. With the MQM, urban Sindh’s dominant political force, joining the strike call, Karachi and Hyderabad, the party’s citadels, remained closed along with other cities across the province including Larkana and Naudero.
In fact, the present situation in Pakistan has every look of a negotiated civil war — one in which insurgents, in league with a section of the establishment, attempt to convey the psychological message that they count for more than any national institution. In other words, this is a bid to assert supremacy. Many in Pakistan have already begun to wonder as to who actually runs the show. The deal made with the jihadis in Swat, which allowed Sharia law to be established in a limited region, in an open breach of the Pakistan Constitution, was the first inkling anyone had of the extent of influence the jihadi elements had come to enjoy in Pakistan.
All these clearly point to Pakistan’s failure to evolve as one nation. The country has become the epicentre and breeding ground of global terrorism and failed to win the confidence of different communities. Islamabad has never opted the path of diplomacy or negotiation to solve any problem, internal or bilateral. It believes only in the policy of propaganda.
(The writer is a freelancer based in Halakura, Dhubri) SOURCE: THE SENTINEL
Since the controversial Indo-Pakistan joint statement, the Balochistan issue has once again acquired a new resonance. Rumour of a mysterious dossier containing evidence of Indian involvement in the Baloch insurgency has attracted the attention of political parties in India, although the government of India has denied the existence of both the dossier and putative support for the insurgent outfits active in Balochistan. But Islamabad was quick to equate Balochistan and Kashmir despite the fact that it treats Balochistan mostly from the point of view of resource extraction.
Pakistan, on July 24, made fresh allegations about India’s involvement in terrorist activities in that country, with Interior Minister Rehman Malik telling National Assembly that Indian intelligence agencies were running training camps in Afghanistan to foment unrest in Balochistan. Malik said that terrorist training camps in Afghanistan were training Baloch youths to create disturbance in the southwestern province. He claimed that these camps were being run by Indian intelligence agencies. The Interior Minister also said that Islamabad had informed New Delhi about the training camps after getting “strong evidence” from Pakistani intelligence agencies. He said Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani too had raised the issue of India’s alleged involvement in Balochistan with his counterpart Manmohan Singh during a recent meeting in Egypt. As was expected, aiming to stem the controversy over the inclusion of Balochistan in the India-Pakistan joint statement, Home Minister P Chidambaram has asserted that New Delhi has “nothing to do with Pakistan’s internal affairs”.
In fact, since January 2005, Pakistan’s Baluchistan province has been embroiled in a rash of violence that threatens to deteriorate into civil war. But violence in Baluchistan historically has been the product of several factors: a fiercely independent Baluch people that eschew outside interference; the lasting legacy of British policy; mismanagement by ruling Pakistani regimes; and historical grievances that have allowed Baluch leaders to mobilize support for their nationalist cause. The most recent surge of violence in Baluchistan is a result of a change in the relationship between the central government and Baluchistan brought about by the province’s growing strategic significance. While the United States currently views the conflict in Baluchistan as an internal matter, growing violence and continued instability in a region where the presence of the Taliban and Al Qaeda is widespread makes this a crisis worthy of US attention. Human rights organizations have also called upon the United Nations to raise the issue of enforced disappearance in Pakistan at the 10th session of the Human Rights Council (Geneva, March 2-27, 2009) to follow up on Pakistan’s previous pledge to begin to resolve the issue.
Despite several promises to resolve the country’s crisis of “disappearance’’, Pakistan’s new civilian government has not yet provided information on hundreds of cases of people believed to be held secretly by the government as part of the so-called war on terror, or in response to internal opposition. On several occasions in the past, Amnesty International has asked the government to come clear on this issue. In 2008, the organization used official court records and affidavits of victims and witnesses of enforced disappearances to show how government officials, especially from the country’s security and intelligences agencies, were resorting to a variety of tactics to conceal enforced disappearance. These include denial of detention having taken place and of all knowledge of the fate and whereabouts of “disappeared” persons; refusing to obey judicial orders; and concealing the identity of the detaining authorities.
Baluchistan has a history of insurgency with local groups advocating greater autonomy. Four waves of violent unrest took place in 1948, 1958-59, 1962-63 and 1973-77. Local people in Baluchistan are demanding a bigger share of the revenue generated by the province’s natural resources, principally natural gas, which they believe now benefit other provinces. A number of Baluchi groups are seeking more rights for the province. Some of these groups have resorted to violence, while others are campaigning peacefully. The Pakistan government has attempted to suppress this opposition by increasing military presence in the region. The confrontation between Baluch nationalists and the state is characterized by human rights abuses committed by all sides. But Islamabad has been actively blocking information in its efforts to cover up the indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force and the lack of accountability of security agencies operating in Balochistan. Nevertheless, news has been gradually trickling in. Indeed, the successive regimes in Pakistan and their political proxies have repeatedly sought to lay the blame on ‘hidden hand’ and ‘external actors’ — with India and the US recurring in the statements of the radical forces active in that country.
The separatist movement in Balochistan brings to the fore the social set-up of Pakistan and failure of the country to evolve as a true nation. As hundreds and thousands of people displaced by the military operation in Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province as well as Balochistan desperately seek food and shelter in other parts of the country, the unfolding humanitarian crisis brings out the country’s ethnic faultlines. The MQM, which raised the spectre of the “Talibanization” of Pakistani society several months ago, had already demanded an end to the flow of Baluch migration, alleging that Taliban terrorists were using this method to infiltrate. With the MQM, urban Sindh’s dominant political force, joining the strike call, Karachi and Hyderabad, the party’s citadels, remained closed along with other cities across the province including Larkana and Naudero.
In fact, the present situation in Pakistan has every look of a negotiated civil war — one in which insurgents, in league with a section of the establishment, attempt to convey the psychological message that they count for more than any national institution. In other words, this is a bid to assert supremacy. Many in Pakistan have already begun to wonder as to who actually runs the show. The deal made with the jihadis in Swat, which allowed Sharia law to be established in a limited region, in an open breach of the Pakistan Constitution, was the first inkling anyone had of the extent of influence the jihadi elements had come to enjoy in Pakistan.
All these clearly point to Pakistan’s failure to evolve as one nation. The country has become the epicentre and breeding ground of global terrorism and failed to win the confidence of different communities. Islamabad has never opted the path of diplomacy or negotiation to solve any problem, internal or bilateral. It believes only in the policy of propaganda.
(The writer is a freelancer based in Halakura, Dhubri) SOURCE: THE SENTINEL
No comments:
Post a Comment