Balochistan: Sifting facts from fiction

By Mohammad Jamil
Exclusive Article

Recently, Waseem Altaf has written an article under the title ‘Accession at gunpoint’, which was carried among others by Viewpoint Online. And as the title suggests the author was convinced that Balochistan’s accession was sought by Pakistan under duress.

The treatise is informative in many ways, but it is an amalgam of facts and fiction. He wrote: “During British Raj Balochistan did not enjoy the status of a province but comprised four princely states namely: Makran, Kharan, Lasbela and Kalat. The Khan of Kalat was the Head of the Confederacy.
The northern areas of Balochistan including Bolan Pass, Quetta, Nushki and Naseerabad were leased out to Britain, which were later, named as British Balochistan. However, more importantly, the Khan had agreed with Jinnah that an understanding must be reached between Kalat and Pakistan on Defense, Foreign Affairs and Communications”.
It has to be mentioned that Khan of Kalat was head of a small tribe namely Brohi, who had assured that nobody would create problems for the British. Thus he was made head of the Confederacy by the British, which was more of a norm to extend its influence in the region and elsewhere.
There are many myths about Balochistan and the one of them is that Balochistan was never part of undivided India. Secondly, that it had a special status vis-à-vis other princely states of undivided India.
The fact remains that at the time of partition, Viceroy Lord Mountbatten addressing the Durbar of princely states had declared that suzerainty of the Crown had ended and advised them to joint India or Pakistan keeping in view the interests of the people and geographical contiguity.
Though in the Partition Plan of 3rd June 1947, the principle of the division of the subcontinent was laid down that Muslim majority areas were to become Pakistan and Hindu majority would form India, yet Lord Mountbatten ignored this principle with regard to accession of more than 550 Princely States. Anyhow, it was nowhere mentioned that the princely states would sign treaties leaving Foreign Affairs, Defence and Communications only with the dominion.
The author went on to state: “On 15th of July 1947 Sir Geoffrey Prior wrote letters to Jam Sahab Lasbela and Nawab Sahab of Kharan communicating their subordinate status to the Khan of Kalat”. Once suzerainty had ended, Sir Geoffrey Prior had no business to tell Jam Sahab of Lasbela and Nawab of Kharan that they were under Khan of Kalat.
On August 15, 1947 when the British withdrew from India, the Khan of Kalat said in his speech: “I thank God that one aspiration, that is independence, has been achieved, but the other two, the enforcement of Shariah-i-Muhammadi and unification of Baloch people, remain to be fulfilled”.
It is not difficult to infer from this statement that Baloch people were not supportive of Khan of Kalat and had a different perception, which was evidenced by Mekran, Kharan and Lasbela’s decision of acceding to Pakistan. Khan of Kalat being an intelligent man could visualize that with the coastal line states joining Pakistan, Kalat would become landlocked.
He, therefore, perforce signed the accession, It is therefore wrong to say that Khan of Kalat was forced to sign the accession at gunpoint. Secondly, Khan of Kalat had no influence over the Pakhtun belt or British Balochistan, where the British had appointed commissioners and were running the areas under their administrative system. We once again wish to correct the perception of the author who wrote: “On 17th March 1948 the Government of Pakistan announced accession of Kharan and Lasbela. Similarly, Makran which was part of Kalat for 300 years was declared a separate state and annexed”.

The fact is well-documented that Kharan, Lasbela and Mekran had applied for accession to Pakistan. Mir Habibullah Khan Ruler of Kharan had written to the Quaid that he had repudiated supremacy of Kalat, and vowed to accede to Pakistan. He said that before the British, Kharan was under the influence of Afghanistan. British had to pay Rs. 6000 per year until 15th August 1947 in lieu of the allowance it used to get from Afghanistan.
It is an irrefragable fact that the British used to give stipends to sardars, but a major portion was given to the chieftains of the tribes. However, after independence, sardars wanted to pocket all perks and privileges and became owners of the resources without sharing them with their chieftains and tribals.
Sardar Akbar Bugti was one of the glaring examples of sardars who ruled roost in their areas; he wanted more than his share and wanted that all appointments in Sui Gas field be made on his behest. But Balochistan is a divided polity where Bugtis, Mengals and Marris dominate their areas, whereas in Pushtun belt they have no influence.
This is borne out by the fact there is no insurgency in Pushtun and even Baloch areas under Magsis, Raisanis and some other Baloch denominations.
Nevertheless, tribalism is firmly rooted in Balochistan, as ethnic and tribal identity is a potent force for both individuals and groups in Balochistan with the result that there exists deep polarization among different groups. Each of these groups is based on different rules of social organization, which has left the province inexorably fragmented.
Tribal group-ism has failed to integrate the state and enforce a national identity. But those who have not weaned off the poison of sham nationalism should take a look at the history of the Balkans, and the fate they met. A couple of times Sardar Ataullah Mengal appeared in a television interview and to a question he said that America does not pay any attention, and if it helps Baloch can win independence.
In fact, big powers and even countries of the region eye Balochistan because it is mineral-rich and strategically-located province. But it needs peace for creating climate conducive to investment and development, which would help improve the living conditions of the people of Balochistan. Through Balochistan package, the government has tried to address the concerns of people of Balochistan. Army’s role in Balochistan’s development is commendable.
Thousands of Baloch have joined as recruits and cadets, which will enable them to play their part in the defence of the motherland. It has been decided to provide them health facilities in Combined Military Hospitals; health camps have also been established. Schools and vocational centres have been opened to help Baloch youth to be productive citizens. These steps will increase income of the Baloch youth to lessen their dependence on sardars and centrifugal forces. At the present, militants are actively involved in worsening the security situation in Balochistan, and insurgency has hampered the growth and development of the province. Balochistan is indeed in the throes of ethnic, sectarian and tribal schisms. There have been targeted killings of Punjabi settlers in Balochistan. Ethnic and Shia-Sunni fracas has shaken the erstwhile ethnic and sectarian harmony, as criminal gangs are stoking ethnic and sectarian divisions. Sardar Ataullah Mengal, Sardar Khair Bakhsh Marri and scions of late Akbar Bugti should try to safeguard the interests of Balochis but through democratic struggle, and help stop bloodshed. We also strongly urge the government that measures should be taken to address the grievances of the smaller provinces, and in this regard Punjab and Sindh should sacrifice for giving more than their share of Balochistan and NWFP with a view to improving their lives.

-The writer is a veteran analyst based in Lahore
The article is contributed to pkarticleshub.com