STATE OF EDUCATION IN BALOCHISTANIslamabad, June 2, 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The 18th Amendment in the Constitution of Pakistan has devolved the matters of primary to higher secondary education to the provinces in terms of reforms and review of the current educational status. The Articles 25-A, 31 and 37 (subsection a, b and c) of the Constitution call for free education for all children between ages 5 to 16 years as education is considered a fundamental right of every citizen of Pakistan. But in reality and according to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) reports, around 5.5 million children are out of school, placing Pakistan at the second position on the global list with most children out of school. The report also places Pakistan among the 21 countries facing an “extensive” learning crisis.[[1]]
1. Education Emergency in Balochistan:
According to Pakistan Social Living and Measurement Survey conducted by Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, among all four provinces, Balochistan lags behind in terms of the literacy rate, which is 46 % as compared to 59 % in Punjab, 56 % in Sindh, and 49 % in KP. In addition, the Gender Parity Index (GPI) score for Balochistan is 0.35 which is way lower than Punjab (0.69), Sindh (0.61) and KPK (0.49).[[2]] The key challenges and the factors hampering the process of education in Balochistan include the access to the schools, poor quality of education, high dropout rate against enrollment and low gender parity score.
2. Access to Educational Facilities:
Currently there are about 22,000 settlements in Balochistan but the availability of schools is only for 10,000 settlements.[[3]] Out of five children, one child has to travel more than 30 minutes to reach his or her school.[[4]] The same time in other provinces is measured at 10 minutes, or less, to travel to school.[[5]] The second major problem is non-availability of the middle school level education facilities. It is reported that there is only one middle school for 11 primary schools.[[6]] The overall school score in Balochistan is 26.61% which is the least among all the other provinces. [[7]]
Sources: BEMIS Census, 2010-2011[[8]]
3. Enrolment and Retention Ratios:
National Plan of Action (2013-1016) compiled by the Ministry of Education, reports that about 1 million children are out of school in Balochistan, while a total of 1.09 million students are enrolled in 12,000 private and government schools with 83,000 students in Madrassa.[[9]] According to Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, the net primary completion rate is at 56 % on overall basis with a higher completion rate in boys at 59.4 % than girls at 51.3 %, and also higher completion rate in urban students at 67.3 % than those from rural areas at 52.7 % while the overall dropout rate is 22 %. [[10]] The transition ratio comes down drastically as student progress to higher classes. For every 8 children in primary school, only three children reach up to secondary level.[[11]] The major reason behind the low enrolment and high dropout rates encompass financial grievances and the lack of awareness, resources and the non-availability of adequate schooling facility.
4. Gender Disparity:
The Gender Parity Index (GPI) for primary school adjusted Net Attendance Ratio (NAR) of girls to boys has been reported at 0.83. The GPI ratio in urban areas of Balochistan is at 0.91 and in rural areas it is at 0.79, which also depicts the lowest participation of girls from rural areas. GPI ratio in secondary schools adjusted NAR of girls to boys has been reported at 0.60. At secondary level of education, urban and rural ratio is at 0.86 and 0.48 respectively, showing much lower participation rate of girls at secondary level than that at primary level particularly. Over all gender parity index score for Balochistan is 0.35.[[12]]
One of the prime reasons of low girl participation is the non-availability of local female teachers and the accessibility of school in the proximal areas.[[13]] Ratio of female teachers on overall primary to higher secondary level is only 36 % in Balochistan.[[14]]
5. Quality of Education:
Unfortunately, it is not only the less number of schools which plagues the education sector; the missing facilities are yet another immense challenge for the government.
According to UNESCO, nearly 57% of the schools lack the facilities of drinking water, 46% have no boundary walls, 52% are without electricity, and 29% do not have toilets. In addition to these missing facilities, 9% are even without shelter.[[15]]
Besides the infrastructure gap, government also has to deal with the challenge that shortage of teachers pose. In a list of countries that have the highest shortfall of teachers, Pakistan is the only non-African country enlisted by Education for All, Global Monitoring Report.[[16]] Over all, from primary to high school level, pupil-teacher ratio in Balochistan is 30.0 %.[[17]]
In January 2014, Chief Minister Balochistan Dr. Abdul Malik Baloch declared education emergency in the province, yet no conclusive protocol has been put forth by the provincial government to provide support to the decaying education structure. [[18]] Since the 18thamendment has minimized the federal role and devolved the powers to the provinces, provinces are now responsible to set their own curriculum and standards of education. The provincial government is also bound by the law of the constitution to ensure the implementation of the Article 25-A which guarantees the free education for all. Still, 31.4 % of children aged between 6 and 16 are not enrolled in schools, from which girls account for 21% of this figure and boys account for 13% in Balochistan only.[[19]] The seriousness of the issue requires some diligent consideration from the provincial government to deal with the deteriorating state of education in the province.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Showing posts with label BALUCHISTAN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BALUCHISTAN. Show all posts
June 2, 2014
BALUCHISTAN POOR EDUCATION SYSTEM
April 13, 2013
Balochistan insurgency and Dubai connection….
Gwadar Deep Sea Port on Makran coast, built with Chinese assistance is a great achievement for Pakistan. The port can provide an energy corridor for China and an economical low-cost trade route for the land-locked Central Asian States through the province of Balochistan. This port which is strategically located at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz was built by China but its operations were handed over to Port of Singapore Authority (PSA). Very close to this port, another deep sea port atChabahar in Iran was built by India. Both the ports have the potential to link Makran coast to Afghanistan and Central Asia. But both these ports have strategic as well as commercial significance. India’s aim to build the port and oversee its operations was to extend its influence in the area and encircle Pakistan. But to the contrary, India will be encircled if China obtains similar influence in Gwadar. The port of Myanmar to the east of India has already been built by China.
India has built Chabahar Port on the Makran Coast to keep a watchful eye on Pakistan’s Gwadar Port on the same coast. USA’s and Indian’s interests converge to the extent of the utility of this port to check China and Pakistan.
It may be kept in mind that Iran is pursuing a multi-billion dollar railways project which was named “Iran’s Eastern Corridor”. It will connect Chabahar port to Central Asia, Afghanistan and Central Iran. This project would have three branches including Chabahar-Iranshahr Fahraj County, Chabahar-Iranshahre-Zahedan-Mashahd and Chabahar-Iranshahr-Zahedan-Milak. India is helping develop the Chabahar port, which will give it access to the oil and gas resources in Iran and the Central Asian states. This is done by India to compete with the Chinese, who are building Gwadar Port, in Pakistani Balochistan. Iran plans to use Chabahar for transshipment to Afghanistan and Central Asia, while keeping the port of Bandar Abbas as a major hub mainly for trade with Russia and Europe. India, Iran and Afghanistan have signed an agreement to give Indian goods, heading for Central Asia and Afghanistan, preferential treatment and tariff reductions at Chabahar.
Work on the Chabahar – Milak – Zaranj – Dilaram route from Iran to Afghanistan is in progress. Iran with Indian aid is upgrading the Chabahar-Milak road and constructing a bridge on the route to Zaranj. India’s BRO is laying the 213-kilometer Zaranj-Dilaram road. It is a part of its USD 750 million aid package to Afghanistan by India. India and Iran are discussing building a gas pipeline between the two countries along the bed of the Arabian Sea to bypass Pakistan, using the Chabahar port.
Thus there are three obvious stakeholders (read: opponents) of Gwadar port; India, US and Iran. The interests of India and US converge on this very issue and in order to keep the port non-operational, both the countries are fanning and funding insurgency in Balochistan so that Pakistan remains unable to build rail and road infrastructure in Balochistan which is very vital for port operation. Baloch Liberation Army is basically an Indian and American proxy whose misdeeds are being glorified by Indian, Western and a part of Pakistani media. The issue of “missing persons” being pursued so vigorously is a part of the game plan. Pressurizing the apex court to indict the security establishment is a part of this plan.
Unfortunately, there is a fourth player of the game which Pakistanis have not so far been able to clearly identify. It is Pakistan’s so-called friend; United Arab Emirate. UAE has its own interests in Balochistan and Gwadar port. Everyone knows that Gwadar has the potential to undermine UAE’s commercial interests by taking trans-shipment business away from the port of Dubai. UAE is also one of the financiers of the BLA.
According to media reports and WikiLeaks, former DG ISI while briefing Pakistani parliamentarians claimed India and the UAE (reportedly due to opposition to construction of the Gwadar port) were funding and arming the Baloch. The infamousShamsi Air Base in Balochistan, from where the drones operated, was built by UAE Sheikhs and handed over to USA. The UAE’s interests in Balochistan may not be for falcon hunting alone. Arabs are wary of Iran’s growing power and can cut a deal with anyone, including devil, to undermine Iran’s interests.
Baloch insurgents often claimed that they receive financial support from Dubai through Baloch diaspora. BLA, the darling of anti-Pakistan elements has strong presence in Dubai, Switzerland and Afghanistan and UAE’s intelligence agency is working in cover to support the insurgents.
Unfortunately, Pakistani diaspora working in the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia bring back home not only their hard-earned money but incidental Arab influence. We have an unwarranted emotional influence of Arab countries which allows them to meddle in our internal affairs. They will, however, safeguard their own interest even if they have to sacrifice Pakistan.
April 9, 2013
Mines of the Sor Range BALUCHISTAN
Coal is one of Balochistan’s main natural resources, and coal mining began here during British colonial times. The majority of coal miners come from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa area, and they work as contracted labourers. Unsound safety and security conditions have made life very difficult for the non-local miners. –Photos and text by Mukhtar Azad
April 8, 2013
THE KILLING OF PUNJABI SETTLERS IN BALUCHISTAN
Settlers — caught in crossfire By Nasir Jamal 29th June, 2011 QUETTA:“They keep changing the menu,” a hotel attendant in Quetta sums up the scale and scope of the target killing of settlers in Balochistan. “Almost all non-Baloch are on their hit-list.” Nearly 1,200 settlers are estimated to have been killed across Balochistan, mostly in what are referred to as hit-and-run incidents and grenade attacks on their businesses and homes. According to Balochistan Punjabi Ittehad, some 200,000 people have fled Balochistan since early 2008 when the violence against various ethnic groups excluding Pashtuns peaked. Other estimates put the number at 100,000. In any case the migration has been significant. Muhammad Khalid of Balochistan Punjabi Ittehad says “the militants began to target the Punjabi settlers after Nawab Bugti was taken out by the military (in August, 2006). Before that there were occasional incidents in which Punjabis were targeted”.
The settler killings increased soon after the Feb 2008 elections. It was the time when the Baloch militant organisations such as Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) began to paint such slogans as ‘down with Punjabis’, ‘Long Live Azad Balochistan’, etc. “My own election billboards were sprayed by the BLA activists with these slogans,” says Anwaarul Haq Kakar, a young PML-N leader whose National Assembly constituency in Quetta mostly comprises Punjabi settlers. “A vast majority of settlers killed in the beginning were service providers from Punjab running barber shops, laundries and tailoring shops. Later the militants also began to target teachers, doctors, lawyers and other professionals,” says Mohammad Amir, who is also associated with the Balochistan Punjabi Ittehad. The first ‘high-profile’ killing in Quetta was of the provincial education minister, Shafique Ahmed, in 2009, he says. It was followed by the killings of school and college teachers, university professors and others. Mostly Punjabis were the target but other ethnic groups were also hit — Urdu-speaking people from Karachi and Hindko-speaking settlers from Haripur in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. In many cases, people tell this reporter, those hit by the insurgents had earlier received pamphlets warning them to leave immediately.
The target killing has created an atmosphere of fear and terror among the settlers in the entire Balochistan. While Quetta still hosts a substantially large population of Punjabi and other settlers, few remain in the Baloch areas of the province. Even in Quetta the settlers are afraid of going to areas such as Sariab Road, a Baloch-dominated neighbourhood. Many old Sariab Road dwellers, including Pashtuns, have sold their property and moved to non-Baloch quarters of the city for safety. “The property prices in Baloch areas are at their lowest because of the exodus from there,” a Pashtun dealing in rice business in Quetta says. Only those Punjabi settlers who had been assured of protection by Baloch tribes or those working on government projects under the watch of the security forces still remain in the Baloch areas. Chacha Raheem came to Quetta from Rawalpindi in search of livelihood more than 22 years ago. He says “only people who don’t have anyone to fall back on or those who lack the financial means to relocate or have (provincial) government jobs are staying back”. Others say there are many who have actually given up their government jobs to return to Punjab. Around 10 incidents of target killings have taken place in Quetta during 2011. This is a reduction in violence which is often linked by the officials and others to the ‘discovery’ of 170-odd bodies of Balochs believed to be ‘separatists’ involved in ‘murders’ and ‘terrorism’. Amir of Punjabi Ittehad says, consequently, “almost 50 per cent of the settlers who had left Quetta since the start of violence have come back.”
But many, such as Chacha Raheem, do not agree with Amir’s assessment. “Why would anyone come back?” Chacha asks. “To get killed or relocate in another six months or a year?” he wonders. “Who knows what is afoot? No one can guarantee that the Baloch rebels who have gone underground will not resurface and start killing the settlers again.” It is difficult to put a number on them, but some, at least some of those who had left close relatives behind in the city, are returning to Quetta. PML-N’s Kakar recalls how the Punjabi settlers “forced out by the government of Sardar Attaullah Mengal in the early 1970s” returned “because the Baloch or the Pashtuns did not have the skills or education to replace them”. Are we going to see a repeat of that now? The Baloch associated with the ‘resistance’ do not think so. “We want all settlers, particularly the Punjabis and the Urdu-speaking, to leave our land. They are colonialists and our enemies. We don’t want collaborators of the Pakistan military on our soil,” says a former activist of the Balochistan Students Organisation (Azad) who is currently affiliated with the movement for an independent Balochistan. “We are being treated as Red Indian and our existence is in danger.”
He defends target killing of Punjabi and other settlers, saying it will soon lead to ‘freedom from Pakistan’. “How can you expect us to let your people live in peace when our own land has been turned into a hell for us,” he contends, adding that the killing and ‘mutilation’ of a couple of hundred ‘freedom fighters’ cannot quash their movement for liberation. “It won’t be very long before we come back for those who haven’t left our soil yet.” For many moderate Baloch intellectuals and writers target killings of Punjabis and other settlers — though a ‘human problem’ — are a way for the insurgent groups of communicating to the world that ‘we want to be independent’. “Punjabis came here to live and work under the British Raj as food suppliers, camp followers and providers of skilled labour and services. Now they have become chief justice, IG police and occupy senior positions in the government at our expense,” says a leading ‘moderate’ Baloch writer in Quetta.
“This is like speaking to a press conference for them,” he says and adds it becomes difficult to take a position against insurgency and killings of settlers when people speaking for the rights of the Baloch people are being abducted and their bodies dropped from the air by the security forces, in the presence of a media that is largely silent. A pamphlet by the Balochistan Liberation Front delivered to several Quetta-based journalists some time ago warned the journalists against becoming a part of the ‘dirty game’ being played by Pakistan’s security forces against the Baloch freedom movement. “Do not try to cover up the Pakistani security forces’ black deeds against the Baloch. Do not also try to play down the forces’ losses at the hands of the BLF,” it said. It is not Baloch insurgents alone who are speaking through target killings. The security forces are also using bullets and violence to send a ‘tough’ message across to them. Caught in the crossfire are the common people.
April 1, 2013
Nothing but provincial autonomy By Shamim-ur-Rahman
‘Whoever comes to Balochistan from outside should not have the right to vote. If this doesn’t happen, then political rights and leadership of the Baloch people will be taken over by those who don’t belong to the province. Once an outsider working in Balochistan is included in the voters’ list, he will usurp political rights of the locals along with their employment opportunities,’ says Hasil Bizenjo.
Typical Baloch Folk Singer
Violence is rampant in Balochistan. Almost on a daily basis people are being killed in the province. As the military operation is going on in the region, both sides — the government and those who are fighting against it — are seen trading allegations. The government is once again blaming the involvement of a ‘foreign hand’ in the situation, calling the attackers terrorists and law-breakers. On the other hand, the government is also being accused of committing excesses against the people as many children and women have lost their lives in the conflict.
Recently, Dawn Magazine put some questions related to the situation in Balochistan to the Secretary-General of the National Party, Mir Hasil Bizenjo, who believes that the current struggle is not a new phenomenon. It has been going on from the time when the British hadn’t even left the subcontinent. According to him, before partition of the subcontinent the same leadership of the Baloch people was fighting against the British. The first political platform that was formed in Balochistan at that time was “Ustama Gal” (National Party) — Mir Abdul Aziz Kurd, Mir Ghous Baksh Bizenjo, Gul Khan Naseer and Malik Yousufzai were its members.
Mir Hasil Bizenjo says that after the Union Jack was lowered in the subcontinent, three independent states emerged. Burma, the Kalat state and India, and consequently Pakistan came into being. On August 11, Balochistan’s independence was announced because it was among those states that were not under the viceroy’s rule. But when the Quaid-i-Azam, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, approached two or three smaller states which were ruled by Kalat but were not a part of it — such as Kharan, Makran and Lasbela — they acceded to Pakistan on their own and without consulting the Kalat state. The other part of Balochistan, which was then called the British Balochistan, comprised lands they had taken from the Khan of Kalat — Quetta, Noshki and Pushtoon — on lease. Marri and Bugti agencies were part of that. The Marris and the Bugtis also joined Pakistan. The Khanate of Kalat’s own parliament had all the Sardars of Balochistan as members of its upper house. And all the political activists who were then called Aalijah were members too. Both the houses rejected the proposal to join Pakistan.
The Quaid-i-Azam’s stand was that a Muslim state was being created which they should join. But in his speech Mir Ghous Baksh Bizenjo, who was a member of the lower house, took the stance that if it was the case of being a Muslim state, then Iran and some others should also be made part of it. If that was not the case, it was not necessary for Balochistan to join Pakistan. Despite that, in Karachi, the Khan of Kalat on his own announced accession to Pakistan under an agreement. It envisaged that the sovereign position of the Kalat state would be maintained and its privileges and laws would not be changed. It would not be completely merged into Pakistan.
After the sad demise of the Quaid-i-Azam difficulties cropped up when Iskandar Mirza came to power. He refused to adhere to previous agreements and said it was part and parcel of Pakistan. And thus he fired the first salvo at Balochistan. In 1958, for the first time the Pakistan Army was asked to move into Balochistan when Ayub Khan took over the reins of the country. As a result, many Balochis went into the mountains. Ayub Khan captured the Kalat state and the Khan of Kalat. Many of his family members were also arrested and killed. During this period, Ustama Gal took the form of a proper political group and it joined hands with G.M. Syed’s and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s party and formed the National Party. As Maulana Bhashani joined the party, it was transformed into the National Awami Party at his insistence.
Hasil Bizenjo also refers to the DAC movement against Ayub Khan that led to his and One Unit’s collapse after which Balochistan emerged as a compact entity. In Balochistan and the NWFP, the NAP formed a coalition with the JUI. The first problem the new government faced was that of framing the constitution because if the two units had not signed it, it would not have been possible to frame the constitution. When Z.A. Bhutto dismissed Balochistan and NWFP governments, the people of Balochistan again went into the mountains. This can be termed as the longest military operation in the province. It ended when Ziaul Haq took over. Bhutto was hanged and the Hyderabad tribunal was disbanded. All the allegations that are being levelled against Baloch leaders these days were levelled against them in 1973 as well.
Talking about the genesis of the current crisis, Hasil Bizenjo says since 1973, two types of political thinking in Balochistan have taken root. One was that democratic struggle should continue and through that Balochistan’s rights should be secured and protected. But the proponents of the other type of thinking advocated an armed struggle as the only solution to get rid of dictatorship. They believed that military rulers and dictators only understood that kind of language. The two approaches are different. And the federal government, particularly the military, is playing a significant role in pushing the Baloch people towards militancy. Gen Musharraf has decided that he can herd everyone with the same stick which is evident from the use of brute force in Waziristan and his attitude towards Sindh with respect to the Kalabagh dam and other sensitive issues, not to mention his policies in Balochistan. Mir Hasil Bizenjo believes that if the military continues this operation with the same intensity, then ‘resorting to militancy’ will be the most popular slogan in Balochistan.
The following are excerpts from the interview:
Q: When Mir Ghous Buksh Bizenjo was governor of Balochistan, he raised the slogan “Balochistan first”. It created a lot of tension and was used as a pretext by Bhutto to dismiss the NAP government in the NWFP and Balochistan. Even now it is said that it’s an attempt to get hold of Balochistan’s resources. And that the development projects announced by the government in the province would not benefit the people of Balochistan. How far is this argument credible? Has the process of colonization begun in the province?
A: This is not our argument alone. Sindh and the NWFP speak about the same issues. It is a totally wrong concept that we oppose development. The basic question is about the nature and modalities of development.That is why the basic demand of Balochistan’s political parties is that provinces must be given maximum autonomy. Trust them and give them the authority to undertake development projects in their respective provinces.
Balochistan’s biggest natural resource is gas. It was discovered in 1952 and the federation has earned more than 500 billion rupees from it, but not even its two per cent has been spent on Balochistan. If gas was explored in Balochistan then it’s the right of the Baloch people to be the first beneficiary of this natural resource. It is also the first right of Balochistan as far as its utility is concerned. If gas was not discovered in 1952, then Pakistan would have used some other imported source of energy and its cost would have gone up to trillions of rupees.
After the discovery of gas, development took place in the whole of Pakistan. The Saindak project is in Balochistan. Its raw material and mines are in Balochistan. Ironically, its 50 per cent profit is taken by China, 48 per cent by the federal government, and only two per cent is given to the province. The government should have spent at least 50 per cent of the revenue generated from any natural resource on the province of its origin. Gas is supplied to the whole of Punjab, Sindh and the NWFP, but till 1980 people used coal in Quetta because there was no gas supply. Even today a large portion of Quetta is without gas. We do not oppose development of ports. But the government’s claim of starting mega projects in Balochistan is misleading. They have constructed the Mirani dam costing Rs7 billion. It irrigates 35,000 acres of land. In 1993, Ghulam Ishaq Khan told us in Quetta that he had then visited the Mirani dam site. He retired as president of the country and the dam was still not constructed.
Mir Hasil Bizenjo says that after the Union Jack was lowered in the subcontinent, three independent states emerged. Burma, the Kalat state and India, and consequently Pakistan came into being. On August 11, Balochistan’s independence was announced because it was among those states that were not under the viceroy’s rule. But when the Quaid-i-Azam, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, approached two or three smaller states which were ruled by Kalat but were not a part of it — such as Kharan, Makran and Lasbela — they acceded to Pakistan on their own and without consulting the Kalat state. The other part of Balochistan, which was then called the British Balochistan, comprised lands they had taken from the Khan of Kalat — Quetta, Noshki and Pushtoon — on lease. Marri and Bugti agencies were part of that. The Marris and the Bugtis also joined Pakistan. The Khanate of Kalat’s own parliament had all the Sardars of Balochistan as members of its upper house. And all the political activists who were then called Aalijah were members too. Both the houses rejected the proposal to join Pakistan.
The Quaid-i-Azam’s stand was that a Muslim state was being created which they should join. But in his speech Mir Ghous Baksh Bizenjo, who was a member of the lower house, took the stance that if it was the case of being a Muslim state, then Iran and some others should also be made part of it. If that was not the case, it was not necessary for Balochistan to join Pakistan. Despite that, in Karachi, the Khan of Kalat on his own announced accession to Pakistan under an agreement. It envisaged that the sovereign position of the Kalat state would be maintained and its privileges and laws would not be changed. It would not be completely merged into Pakistan.
After the sad demise of the Quaid-i-Azam difficulties cropped up when Iskandar Mirza came to power. He refused to adhere to previous agreements and said it was part and parcel of Pakistan. And thus he fired the first salvo at Balochistan. In 1958, for the first time the Pakistan Army was asked to move into Balochistan when Ayub Khan took over the reins of the country. As a result, many Balochis went into the mountains. Ayub Khan captured the Kalat state and the Khan of Kalat. Many of his family members were also arrested and killed. During this period, Ustama Gal took the form of a proper political group and it joined hands with G.M. Syed’s and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s party and formed the National Party. As Maulana Bhashani joined the party, it was transformed into the National Awami Party at his insistence.
Hasil Bizenjo also refers to the DAC movement against Ayub Khan that led to his and One Unit’s collapse after which Balochistan emerged as a compact entity. In Balochistan and the NWFP, the NAP formed a coalition with the JUI. The first problem the new government faced was that of framing the constitution because if the two units had not signed it, it would not have been possible to frame the constitution. When Z.A. Bhutto dismissed Balochistan and NWFP governments, the people of Balochistan again went into the mountains. This can be termed as the longest military operation in the province. It ended when Ziaul Haq took over. Bhutto was hanged and the Hyderabad tribunal was disbanded. All the allegations that are being levelled against Baloch leaders these days were levelled against them in 1973 as well.
Talking about the genesis of the current crisis, Hasil Bizenjo says since 1973, two types of political thinking in Balochistan have taken root. One was that democratic struggle should continue and through that Balochistan’s rights should be secured and protected. But the proponents of the other type of thinking advocated an armed struggle as the only solution to get rid of dictatorship. They believed that military rulers and dictators only understood that kind of language. The two approaches are different. And the federal government, particularly the military, is playing a significant role in pushing the Baloch people towards militancy. Gen Musharraf has decided that he can herd everyone with the same stick which is evident from the use of brute force in Waziristan and his attitude towards Sindh with respect to the Kalabagh dam and other sensitive issues, not to mention his policies in Balochistan. Mir Hasil Bizenjo believes that if the military continues this operation with the same intensity, then ‘resorting to militancy’ will be the most popular slogan in Balochistan.
The following are excerpts from the interview:
Q: When Mir Ghous Buksh Bizenjo was governor of Balochistan, he raised the slogan “Balochistan first”. It created a lot of tension and was used as a pretext by Bhutto to dismiss the NAP government in the NWFP and Balochistan. Even now it is said that it’s an attempt to get hold of Balochistan’s resources. And that the development projects announced by the government in the province would not benefit the people of Balochistan. How far is this argument credible? Has the process of colonization begun in the province?
A: This is not our argument alone. Sindh and the NWFP speak about the same issues. It is a totally wrong concept that we oppose development. The basic question is about the nature and modalities of development.That is why the basic demand of Balochistan’s political parties is that provinces must be given maximum autonomy. Trust them and give them the authority to undertake development projects in their respective provinces.
Balochistan’s biggest natural resource is gas. It was discovered in 1952 and the federation has earned more than 500 billion rupees from it, but not even its two per cent has been spent on Balochistan. If gas was explored in Balochistan then it’s the right of the Baloch people to be the first beneficiary of this natural resource. It is also the first right of Balochistan as far as its utility is concerned. If gas was not discovered in 1952, then Pakistan would have used some other imported source of energy and its cost would have gone up to trillions of rupees.
After the discovery of gas, development took place in the whole of Pakistan. The Saindak project is in Balochistan. Its raw material and mines are in Balochistan. Ironically, its 50 per cent profit is taken by China, 48 per cent by the federal government, and only two per cent is given to the province. The government should have spent at least 50 per cent of the revenue generated from any natural resource on the province of its origin. Gas is supplied to the whole of Punjab, Sindh and the NWFP, but till 1980 people used coal in Quetta because there was no gas supply. Even today a large portion of Quetta is without gas. We do not oppose development of ports. But the government’s claim of starting mega projects in Balochistan is misleading. They have constructed the Mirani dam costing Rs7 billion. It irrigates 35,000 acres of land. In 1993, Ghulam Ishaq Khan told us in Quetta that he had then visited the Mirani dam site. He retired as president of the country and the dam was still not constructed.
There is no mega project in the region, because the government is constructing its own buildings worth more than nine or 10 billion rupees in other parts of the country. For the first time in the country’s history they have built two roads here. One is the coastal highway, while they are constructing the Gwadar-Khuzdar road as well. These are not mega projects. These are our rights, which we should have had 25 or 30 years ago. Balochistan is almost half of Pakistan. If you can build a network of highways in the rest of the country and are in the process of building just the second such highway in Balochistan, claiming as if something unusual has been given to our people, it is very misleading. We are not opposed to building ports. We have some reservations in this regard. And we think they’re justified.
Q: What are those reservations?
A: The government treats provinces in the One Unit way. If the Nazim of Karachi can manage such a big city, then he can also take care of the port. There are many countries in the world where ports function under local governments. Therefore, we have demanded that instead of giving its control to the Ministry of Communications, it should be given to the Balochistan government. If we can manage the whole province, we can also manage the Gwadar Port. Our argument is that Balochistan is the largest province of the country. Despite this, we don’t have the right to govern and manage our province’s affairs. What will happen if the Punjabis dominate Sindh and plunders its culture or the Sindhis do the same with Punjab? You don’t introduce big industrial ventures that would cause a huge population influx. Our coastal belts are in Bela and Gwadar. If you push about three million people from Sindh, Punjab, the NWFP or Central Asia into Balochistan, then where will the Balochis go? They will be non-existent.
We went into negotiations with the authorities to tell them to respect our rights so that our cultural, linguistic, economic, political, and other identities are protected. We are not yet calling it colonization, but if the government remains stubborn, then it will be the case. We suggested that whosoever came to Balochistan from outside should not have the right to vote. Because if you don’t do that then political rights and leadership of the Baloch people will be taken over by those who don’t belong to the province. Once an outsider working in Balochistan is included in the voters’ list, he will usurp political rights of the Baloch people along with employment opportunities.
Q: But don’t you think that while performing their duties in Balochistan outsiders would spend their income on the province?
A: Those who come to do such jobs usually don’t invest in their place of duty for about 10 to 15 years. They tend to transfer the money to their hometown. Even in Balochistan if a person from Turbat works in Quetta, he will usually send his savings to his village.
Q: During Ghous Buksh Bizenjo’s tenure it was demanded that those outsiders who were serving in Balochistan should pack their bags and leave for their provinces of origin. Is there any such demand now?
A: When the NAP government was formed, all officers in Balochistan, including in the police department, were from Punjab or were Punjabis. When the One Unit was abrogated, there was a provision that such employees in the federating provinces would return to their province of origin. Hence, in Balochistan those belonging to Punjab insisted that they wanted to go back. In the meantime Bhutto, who had ulterior motives, through Ghulam Mustafa Khar manipulated those people. I remember that for the first time in the history of Quetta the police had gone on a strike. The BSO took control of the situation and managed it. Sardar Ataullah in one of his interviews said that we had not decided to throw anybody out. He had even gone to the police bara khana and requested them not to go. But the policemen said they would leave. Perhaps Mr Khar had put in their minds the wrong and baseless assumption that the Baloch people would kill the Punjabis. They were either policemen or teachers. The National Party leadership went to them and asked them not to go. But they insisted that they would like to leave. When we requested teachers not to follow the police, they refused to oblige, knowing well that it would make the education system collapse. They suffered the most in Punjab. Back then, there was no anti-Punjabi mood in Balochistan. When this was going on, Sardar Ataullah Mengal as chief minister moved a resolution in the Balochistan Assembly to do away with the domicile category and suggested that those who had spent several generations in the province should be treated as locals. Saifullah Piracha, who was close to Bhutto and was the representative of settlers, was instrumental in undoing that resolution.
Q: But right now there’s a feeling that whatever is happening in Balochistan is not just anti-government, but is also a resistance movement against Punjab. What’s your take on it?
A: Whenever any problem crops up in smaller provinces, the establishment always plays games with them. Punjab is made to believe that smaller provinces are against it, while the three federating units are made to believe that Punjab and the Punjabis are responsible for all their woes. It is not true. Poverty is rampant in Punjab as well. There are many areas in Punjab which are poorer than Balochistan. Actually, it is not an anti-Punjab movement, but it is against the military establishment, because since 1947 either civil bureaucracy or the military has ruled this country. Democracy was never allowed to function properly. If democratic forces had flourished, the people of Punjab would have been powerful. Unfortunately in Pakistan the military has always ruled, either from behind the scene or otherwise, and it never spared anyone. It has not spared the Punjabis either. Therefore, I think the basic problem here is the military. Unless the four federating units do not send the military back to barracks, these problems will never be solved.
Q: Recently, Gen Musharraf and Sher Afgan Niazi gave statements in which they said that Punjab would not let the federal government survive if it did not pay heed to its demands. Are the mega projects launched in Balochistan Punjab-specific?
A: This impression has gained cogency because the Punjabis dominate bureaucracy and the military. But bureaucracy has its own vested interests and the Sardars and the Chaudhris are its allies. I do appreciate Punjab’s intelligentsia for not supporting Gen Musharraf’s thesis that Punjab will not allow any government to function if it does not support the Kalabagh dam. I believe that the traditional establishment comprising feudals, Sardars and Chaudhris and Islamabad’s establishment (comprising civil and military bureaucracy) are the two biggest monsters of this country.
Q: Keeping in mind the present situation, is there a need for drafting a new social contract or constitution?
A: Our demand is: whether you draft a new constitution or amend the existing one, you must include new realities in it. Now the federating units will not accept absolute power concentrated in the federation. We want the social contract on the basis of the 1940 resolution in which it’s clear that issues regarding foreign affairs, defence and currency should be handled by the federal government, and all tax-collecting and other powers should be given to the federating units.
The problem is that we were not able to resolve the differences that cropped up immediately after independence. As long as the federating units are not given their proper rights, whatever you may do, it will not change the situation and marginalization of democratic forces by militant and extremists forces will become more prominent. In order to resolve the current crisis, implementing the 1940 resolution in letter and spirit is the minimum basic requirement. If you recall, soon after usurping power Pervez Musharraf had talked of provincial autonomy, but he held the local government elections through the Pakistan Election Commission and not the provincial Election Commission. It means that the federal government is directly involved in provincial matters.
Q: Is it possible for political leadership to develop a consensus on the sensitive issue of Balochistan, as it did in the case of the 1973 constitution?
A: We believe that in the situation where we have military dictatorship, consensus would remain a far cry and as long Gen Pervez Musharraf and the military remain at the helm of affairs, animosity would increase and distances between the people would also increase. What you are suggesting is not possible bearing in mind military dictatorship headed by Gen Pervez Musharraf, or any other military man for that matter.
Q: Gen Musharraf has said that only three or four Sardars are responsible for the current turmoil in Balochistan, and the focus is mainly on Dera Bugti and Marri areas. Your comments?
A: The National Party opposes tribalism and the Jagirdari system. Military rulers are not aware of our history and culture which is evident from the manner in which the regime is portraying the Sardars. In the 17th century, the concept of tribal chiefs emerged. It was not a formal institution. It was done by Sandeman. He created and transformed it into a hereditary institution, which was not the case among the Baloch people prior to him. He fixed salaries for them. Those Sardars who opposed the British refused to accept the salary. After the emergence of Pakistan, its bureaucracy continued with the institution of the Sardari system. In fact, it made it stronger. Even today the same thing is happening. Those who are with the government are safe. Bela’s Jam Sahib was in every government since Iskandar Mirza’s time. Now the issue boils down to three Sardars about whom the general is talking. There is no doubt they have their tribal forces. But even if Sardar Ataullah Mengal, Khair Buksh Marri and Akbar Bugti did not have their forces, they would still have assumed the status of legends in Balochistan. They are now our political pundits whether you call them Sardars or traitors. They are the ones who since the ‘60s have fought against Ayub Khan and Ziaul Haq and have remained a part of the political process. They have even endured imprisonment. They will always be respected not because they are the Sardars, but because of the role they’ve played in seeking the rights of the Balochis. And if they are killed by the ruling regime, they will be all the more respected among the Baloch people.
Q: Let’s discuss what is happening in Dera Bugti. Is it a fight for getting gas royalty? From where are they getting weapons?
A: When the Hyderabad tribunal was disbanded, Mir Ghous Buksh Bizenjo decided to take another course and Khair Buksh Marri went on a different track. Khair Buksh Marri’s stand was that the rulers would not understand and accept the demands of the Baloch people as long as the Baloch people did not adopt militancy. Ghous Buksh Bizenjo advocated democratic path through public meetings and rallies. Khair Buksh went to Europe and then to Afghanistan where he continuously preached militancy. He never talked about democracy. He set up his organization and now has an organized force. But in the case of Nawab Akbar Bugti, the situation is somewhat different. He had never talked of militancy. In fact, throughout his whole life he had a good relationship with the establishment. That is why he remained governor and chief minister of the province and played a significant role in the formation as well as downfall of different governments. To call him a traitor or a terrorist is the biggest mistake on the part of the ruling regime. During Zia’s rule he never opted for militant course and was a part of Benazir’s and Nawaz Sharif’s first governments. He never uttered things that could be labelled anti-Pakistan. There is an agreement between the PPL and Nawab Sahib which pertains to the rent of land and other services. He for the first time joined nationalist forces when they objected to the federal government’s taking away all the revenue generating from gas and not sharing it with the people of Balochistan. Then they started targeting him. When this happened and he held meetings with representatives of the government, we objected to the fact that why he’ talking to them alone when there’s a four-party alliance in Balochistan. Nawab Bugti said that he had discussed matters pertaining to Dera Bugti and Sui. On the Balochistan issue he’s part of the alliance. It was decided that gas installations would be jointly guarded by Bugti and FC personnel. Nawab Sahib claims that the attack on him was unprovoked and his people only responded to it.
Q: What are Farari camps?
A: I can’t say whether such camps exist. Nawab Akbar Bugti does not have such camps. But the BLA claims that it does have such camps.
Q: Who is running the BLA?
A: Khair Buksh Marri’s sons claim they are running the BLA.
Q: The government says there is foreign involvement in the situation. It suggests that perhaps India is funding militants through its missions in Afghanistan.
A: I am not aware of it. I don’t blame anyone. If anyone is prepared to give his life for a cause, he will accept assistance from whatever source it’s coming.
Q: Does it have to do with the new Great Game? Sardar Ataullah Mengal had once said that he couldn’t see Pakistan on world map in the next five years or so. Do you share his views?
A: Whenever someone talks of Pakistan’s disintegration his basic argument appears to be that Pakistan is a multi-nation country. To say that balkanization would definitely happen in our country is also wrong because it could happen anywhere in the world. But it is also wrong to assume that if we continue to adopt the same course, this country would survive the jolts of the historical process. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq have entered a new scene. Iraq’s future is becoming increasingly uncertain. Hammas victory in the Palestinian elections also points to something that would lead to uncertainty. Similarly, Iran’s nuclear issue is pushing the region towards another kind of uncertainty. Anything can happen in such a situation.
Q: Is it happening because Pakistan is the frontline state in the war against terrorism?
A: I think that by becoming the frontline state we’ve made it a no-man’s land and Pakistan’s cause has taken a back seat. It seems that we have become another state of the United States. This implies that the rulers have no faith in Pakistan’s people.
Q: What are those reservations?
A: The government treats provinces in the One Unit way. If the Nazim of Karachi can manage such a big city, then he can also take care of the port. There are many countries in the world where ports function under local governments. Therefore, we have demanded that instead of giving its control to the Ministry of Communications, it should be given to the Balochistan government. If we can manage the whole province, we can also manage the Gwadar Port. Our argument is that Balochistan is the largest province of the country. Despite this, we don’t have the right to govern and manage our province’s affairs. What will happen if the Punjabis dominate Sindh and plunders its culture or the Sindhis do the same with Punjab? You don’t introduce big industrial ventures that would cause a huge population influx. Our coastal belts are in Bela and Gwadar. If you push about three million people from Sindh, Punjab, the NWFP or Central Asia into Balochistan, then where will the Balochis go? They will be non-existent.
We went into negotiations with the authorities to tell them to respect our rights so that our cultural, linguistic, economic, political, and other identities are protected. We are not yet calling it colonization, but if the government remains stubborn, then it will be the case. We suggested that whosoever came to Balochistan from outside should not have the right to vote. Because if you don’t do that then political rights and leadership of the Baloch people will be taken over by those who don’t belong to the province. Once an outsider working in Balochistan is included in the voters’ list, he will usurp political rights of the Baloch people along with employment opportunities.
Q: But don’t you think that while performing their duties in Balochistan outsiders would spend their income on the province?
A: Those who come to do such jobs usually don’t invest in their place of duty for about 10 to 15 years. They tend to transfer the money to their hometown. Even in Balochistan if a person from Turbat works in Quetta, he will usually send his savings to his village.
Q: During Ghous Buksh Bizenjo’s tenure it was demanded that those outsiders who were serving in Balochistan should pack their bags and leave for their provinces of origin. Is there any such demand now?
A: When the NAP government was formed, all officers in Balochistan, including in the police department, were from Punjab or were Punjabis. When the One Unit was abrogated, there was a provision that such employees in the federating provinces would return to their province of origin. Hence, in Balochistan those belonging to Punjab insisted that they wanted to go back. In the meantime Bhutto, who had ulterior motives, through Ghulam Mustafa Khar manipulated those people. I remember that for the first time in the history of Quetta the police had gone on a strike. The BSO took control of the situation and managed it. Sardar Ataullah in one of his interviews said that we had not decided to throw anybody out. He had even gone to the police bara khana and requested them not to go. But the policemen said they would leave. Perhaps Mr Khar had put in their minds the wrong and baseless assumption that the Baloch people would kill the Punjabis. They were either policemen or teachers. The National Party leadership went to them and asked them not to go. But they insisted that they would like to leave. When we requested teachers not to follow the police, they refused to oblige, knowing well that it would make the education system collapse. They suffered the most in Punjab. Back then, there was no anti-Punjabi mood in Balochistan. When this was going on, Sardar Ataullah Mengal as chief minister moved a resolution in the Balochistan Assembly to do away with the domicile category and suggested that those who had spent several generations in the province should be treated as locals. Saifullah Piracha, who was close to Bhutto and was the representative of settlers, was instrumental in undoing that resolution.
Q: But right now there’s a feeling that whatever is happening in Balochistan is not just anti-government, but is also a resistance movement against Punjab. What’s your take on it?
A: Whenever any problem crops up in smaller provinces, the establishment always plays games with them. Punjab is made to believe that smaller provinces are against it, while the three federating units are made to believe that Punjab and the Punjabis are responsible for all their woes. It is not true. Poverty is rampant in Punjab as well. There are many areas in Punjab which are poorer than Balochistan. Actually, it is not an anti-Punjab movement, but it is against the military establishment, because since 1947 either civil bureaucracy or the military has ruled this country. Democracy was never allowed to function properly. If democratic forces had flourished, the people of Punjab would have been powerful. Unfortunately in Pakistan the military has always ruled, either from behind the scene or otherwise, and it never spared anyone. It has not spared the Punjabis either. Therefore, I think the basic problem here is the military. Unless the four federating units do not send the military back to barracks, these problems will never be solved.
Q: Recently, Gen Musharraf and Sher Afgan Niazi gave statements in which they said that Punjab would not let the federal government survive if it did not pay heed to its demands. Are the mega projects launched in Balochistan Punjab-specific?
A: This impression has gained cogency because the Punjabis dominate bureaucracy and the military. But bureaucracy has its own vested interests and the Sardars and the Chaudhris are its allies. I do appreciate Punjab’s intelligentsia for not supporting Gen Musharraf’s thesis that Punjab will not allow any government to function if it does not support the Kalabagh dam. I believe that the traditional establishment comprising feudals, Sardars and Chaudhris and Islamabad’s establishment (comprising civil and military bureaucracy) are the two biggest monsters of this country.
Q: Keeping in mind the present situation, is there a need for drafting a new social contract or constitution?
A: Our demand is: whether you draft a new constitution or amend the existing one, you must include new realities in it. Now the federating units will not accept absolute power concentrated in the federation. We want the social contract on the basis of the 1940 resolution in which it’s clear that issues regarding foreign affairs, defence and currency should be handled by the federal government, and all tax-collecting and other powers should be given to the federating units.
The problem is that we were not able to resolve the differences that cropped up immediately after independence. As long as the federating units are not given their proper rights, whatever you may do, it will not change the situation and marginalization of democratic forces by militant and extremists forces will become more prominent. In order to resolve the current crisis, implementing the 1940 resolution in letter and spirit is the minimum basic requirement. If you recall, soon after usurping power Pervez Musharraf had talked of provincial autonomy, but he held the local government elections through the Pakistan Election Commission and not the provincial Election Commission. It means that the federal government is directly involved in provincial matters.
Q: Is it possible for political leadership to develop a consensus on the sensitive issue of Balochistan, as it did in the case of the 1973 constitution?
A: We believe that in the situation where we have military dictatorship, consensus would remain a far cry and as long Gen Pervez Musharraf and the military remain at the helm of affairs, animosity would increase and distances between the people would also increase. What you are suggesting is not possible bearing in mind military dictatorship headed by Gen Pervez Musharraf, or any other military man for that matter.
Q: Gen Musharraf has said that only three or four Sardars are responsible for the current turmoil in Balochistan, and the focus is mainly on Dera Bugti and Marri areas. Your comments?
A: The National Party opposes tribalism and the Jagirdari system. Military rulers are not aware of our history and culture which is evident from the manner in which the regime is portraying the Sardars. In the 17th century, the concept of tribal chiefs emerged. It was not a formal institution. It was done by Sandeman. He created and transformed it into a hereditary institution, which was not the case among the Baloch people prior to him. He fixed salaries for them. Those Sardars who opposed the British refused to accept the salary. After the emergence of Pakistan, its bureaucracy continued with the institution of the Sardari system. In fact, it made it stronger. Even today the same thing is happening. Those who are with the government are safe. Bela’s Jam Sahib was in every government since Iskandar Mirza’s time. Now the issue boils down to three Sardars about whom the general is talking. There is no doubt they have their tribal forces. But even if Sardar Ataullah Mengal, Khair Buksh Marri and Akbar Bugti did not have their forces, they would still have assumed the status of legends in Balochistan. They are now our political pundits whether you call them Sardars or traitors. They are the ones who since the ‘60s have fought against Ayub Khan and Ziaul Haq and have remained a part of the political process. They have even endured imprisonment. They will always be respected not because they are the Sardars, but because of the role they’ve played in seeking the rights of the Balochis. And if they are killed by the ruling regime, they will be all the more respected among the Baloch people.
Q: Let’s discuss what is happening in Dera Bugti. Is it a fight for getting gas royalty? From where are they getting weapons?
A: When the Hyderabad tribunal was disbanded, Mir Ghous Buksh Bizenjo decided to take another course and Khair Buksh Marri went on a different track. Khair Buksh Marri’s stand was that the rulers would not understand and accept the demands of the Baloch people as long as the Baloch people did not adopt militancy. Ghous Buksh Bizenjo advocated democratic path through public meetings and rallies. Khair Buksh went to Europe and then to Afghanistan where he continuously preached militancy. He never talked about democracy. He set up his organization and now has an organized force. But in the case of Nawab Akbar Bugti, the situation is somewhat different. He had never talked of militancy. In fact, throughout his whole life he had a good relationship with the establishment. That is why he remained governor and chief minister of the province and played a significant role in the formation as well as downfall of different governments. To call him a traitor or a terrorist is the biggest mistake on the part of the ruling regime. During Zia’s rule he never opted for militant course and was a part of Benazir’s and Nawaz Sharif’s first governments. He never uttered things that could be labelled anti-Pakistan. There is an agreement between the PPL and Nawab Sahib which pertains to the rent of land and other services. He for the first time joined nationalist forces when they objected to the federal government’s taking away all the revenue generating from gas and not sharing it with the people of Balochistan. Then they started targeting him. When this happened and he held meetings with representatives of the government, we objected to the fact that why he’ talking to them alone when there’s a four-party alliance in Balochistan. Nawab Bugti said that he had discussed matters pertaining to Dera Bugti and Sui. On the Balochistan issue he’s part of the alliance. It was decided that gas installations would be jointly guarded by Bugti and FC personnel. Nawab Sahib claims that the attack on him was unprovoked and his people only responded to it.
Q: What are Farari camps?
A: I can’t say whether such camps exist. Nawab Akbar Bugti does not have such camps. But the BLA claims that it does have such camps.
Q: Who is running the BLA?
A: Khair Buksh Marri’s sons claim they are running the BLA.
Q: The government says there is foreign involvement in the situation. It suggests that perhaps India is funding militants through its missions in Afghanistan.
A: I am not aware of it. I don’t blame anyone. If anyone is prepared to give his life for a cause, he will accept assistance from whatever source it’s coming.
Q: Does it have to do with the new Great Game? Sardar Ataullah Mengal had once said that he couldn’t see Pakistan on world map in the next five years or so. Do you share his views?
A: Whenever someone talks of Pakistan’s disintegration his basic argument appears to be that Pakistan is a multi-nation country. To say that balkanization would definitely happen in our country is also wrong because it could happen anywhere in the world. But it is also wrong to assume that if we continue to adopt the same course, this country would survive the jolts of the historical process. Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq have entered a new scene. Iraq’s future is becoming increasingly uncertain. Hammas victory in the Palestinian elections also points to something that would lead to uncertainty. Similarly, Iran’s nuclear issue is pushing the region towards another kind of uncertainty. Anything can happen in such a situation.
Q: Is it happening because Pakistan is the frontline state in the war against terrorism?
A: I think that by becoming the frontline state we’ve made it a no-man’s land and Pakistan’s cause has taken a back seat. It seems that we have become another state of the United States. This implies that the rulers have no faith in Pakistan’s people.
Balochistan: Authority stamped? By Syed Shahid Husain
Late. Sardar Akbar Bugti
Akbar Bugti’s death may provide satisfaction to some vengeful souls, but they know not what is afoot. The nawab may have been guilty of many crimes, including murders, but he died a brave man fighting and has left an indelible mark on the psyche of the people of Balochistan as a leader who fought for their rights against an exploitative establishment
They hunted him down and killed him mercilessly. Circumstances are getting murkier by the day. Killing one’s own people and bowing before foreign powers make the pillar of our state policy. Nawab Akbar Bugti, even when he was an octogenarian, was a major political player. Balochistan is afire, and how long this fire will take to burn out is anybody’s guess. But the supreme ruler can congratulate himself that he has removed one-third of the impediments in the way of progress by taking care of one of the three sardars. Now Dera Bugti will march ahead into the 21st century.
I remember having met Mr Bugti for the first time in 1997 when I went to call on him after assuming the charge of the provincial chief secretary. It was on the chief minister’s advice that I had called on him. He received me very cordially at his residence in Quetta, which appeared to be a fortified and well-protected place. Even the streets were closed for reasons of security. He had a large number of enemies. We sat on the neatly-carpeted floor. We had about an hour’s conversation. I found him very articulate, forthright and candid. His was an impressive figure and his white hirsute face added to his almost royal bearing. He told me that before the provincial government agreed to my appointment, the federal government had sent three names including mine. Mr Ilahi Bukhsh Soomro called Mr Bugti asking him to choose Mr Hasan Bhutto, one of the panelists. Mr Bugti refused without a minute’s hesitation. When Mr Soomro insisted that the officer had great merit, Mr Bugti said he would never accept a Bhutto, whatever his merits. Mr Soomro assured him that he had no relation with the famous man, but Mr Bugti was not moved.
It was Nawaz Sharif’s government that had come with a heavy mandate at the Centre which showed a welcome change in the attitude towards smaller provinces. Unlike all his predecessors, Mr Sharif decided to take along with him the ‘nationalist leadership’. Mr Akhtar Mengal, who headed the coalition in the provincial assembly of which Mr Bugti was a part, was allowed to form the government despite misgivings in powerful quarters. Soon after, the coalition partners fell out on something or the other and Bugti and Mengal started a media war. Since I got frequent opportunities of meeting the chief minister, I advised him to hold his punches and not to get into something that could go beyond the point of no return. But Mengal, relatively a young man, insisted on confronting Bugti head-on because, according to him, Bugti was a bully and deserved to be treated as such. I told him that any rift in the coalition partners will help the insidious forces to play their dirty games and install someone incompetent and corrupt to do their bidding and represent them rather than the people of Balochistan. Not long afterwards the inevitable happened and the government was dismissed.
Mr Sharif, as soon as he assumed office, travelled all the way from Islamabad to Dera Bugti on prime minister’s jet along with important members of his government and some senior civil servants to call on Bugti. The gesture did not seem to impress Bugti much who appeared to take it into his stride. After all, this was not the first time that he had been wooed by the mighty and the powerful. The plane landed at the Jacobabad airport and one was surprised that Mr Bugti was not waiting at the tarmac to receive the prime minister. The delegation then boarded the helicopter and took off for Dera Bugti. There was no Mr Bugti to receive the prime minister even at the helipad. The delegation then drove to the Bugti House. He was not there even at the outside gate. It was only after the prime minister and his delegation had entered the house that Mr Bugti emerged to receive him at the entrance to the hall, which was to be the venue of the meeting. The delegation was made to sit in the Balochi tradition on the floor and everyone could share the company of the prime minister and Mr Bugti. For a few minutes the two men went to a separate room to talk. Lunch was served and since Mr Bugti ate very spicy meals, he served the guests the same kind of food. Those who were careful chose to pass up the dishes and relied on yogurt and bread to avoid unpleasant consequences.
Before lunch was served, Mr Bugti called one of his underlings to bring a present for the prime minister. This looked like an ordinary stick and was perhaps hand-carved. Mr Bugti ordered his underling to present the stick to the prime minister that he graciously accepted. The chief minister told me afterwards that Mr Bugti’s gesture violated the traditional Balochi courtesy because not personally handing over the present to the prime minister implied that he treated him not on a par with himself, but at a level lower than himself. Otherwise in the Balochi tradition, if he had treated the prime minister as his equal, he would have presented the carved stick with his own hand. That was Bugti, arrogance incarnate.
When he resigned as governor of Balochistan, he did not address Mr Bhutto as prime minister. Mr Sher Baz Mazari has quoted in his book, A Journey to Disillusionment, an instance: when Bhutto visited him at the Governor’s House and showed some annoyance at children playing on the lawn, Bugti ignored the protest and told the prime minister that it was natural for children to play.
Mr Bugti was a very canny character and a tough negotiator. He knew better than any Baloch sardar how to squeeze his opponent to the limit. The Pakistan Petroleum Limited running Sui Gas fields and the OGDCL running some other wells in the area were made to pay through their nose for their presence in those areas either in terms of rent/lease for the land or the employees who had to be given jobs. Some agreements between Mr Bugti and the OGDCL read like treaties between two sovereign entities. His demands easily qualified as extortion.
Mr Sharif, known to be a man in great hurry, wished to make some amendments to the Constitution for which he had the necessary numbers in the National Assembly, but not in the Senate. Mr Bugti had five senators and so did the MQM. The need for these 10 votes acquired special significance whenever an amendment had to be carried through — and that too in a hurry. The provincial government was totally helpless in ensuring the presence of Mr Bugti’s senators in Islamabad. His five senators would hide and prove to be elusive and inaccessible unless some personal representative of the prime minister had spoken to Mr Bugti and fulfilled his demands; most of them relating to payments which Mr Bugti thought were due to him. Not unlike the World Bank, which has begun insisting on compliance of conditionalities upfront before signing a loan, he wanted payment upfront. Some deputy secretary of Finance Department would travel from Islamabad carrying loads of cash before Bugti ordered his henchmen to travel to Islamabad and vote appropriately.
Mr Bugti was a shrewd man. He also knew his limits. Therefore, before he died, he made it known that a standoff between him and General Pervez Musharaff could be resolved on the basis of proposals made by a committee constituted by the regime. But General Musharraf wanted his precise location in the mountains so as to establish the writ of his government. This he seems to have accomplished by executing Bugti in a military operation involving ground troops, helicopter gunship, missiles and whatever, including satellite monitoring of his presence.
Balochistan is at a standstill; Quetta is under curfew; flights have been cancelled; and rail and road links cut off; university hostels have been vacated; hundreds of students arrested; and property worth millions of rupees damaged. Writ indeed!
Akbar Bugti’s death may provide satisfaction to some vengeful souls, but they know not what is afoot. Mr Bugti may be guilty of many crimes, including murders, but he died a brave man fighting, and has left an indelible mark on the psyche of the people of Balochistan as a leader who fought for their rights against a exploitative establishment. He is a Shaheed in the popular sense and every political leader of Balochistan will have to champion his cause under his rubric and in his name. He ranks next to the Mari Nawab in tribal hierarchy, but his political standing has now surpassed all others.
The future is frighteningly bleak. The situation is reminiscent of 1971 when a military junta was confronting the combined might of public opinion in a particular province only to avoid transferring power to the people.
A turbulent Balochistan hardly suits the United States, which is fighting its war ‘against terror’ in this region by occupying Afghanistan through Nato forces. The statement of the American government spokesman that it “would like to see the Balochistan dispute settled within the framework of strong and united Pakistan” is ominous. Declassified US papers bear close resemblance to the US government position on East Pakistan. The outcome is there for everyone to see. They had Gen Yahya Khan provide Henry Kissinger a safe passage to China and here we have another general fighting their war on terror. Americans are never very squeamish about principles, least of all about democracy.
Balochistan may have slipped out of hand and it is not unlikely that gas supply to the cities of Pakistan may suddenly be disrupted with the government feeling totally helpless.
In such circumstances the United States might have to dust off some of the think-tank reports proposing realignment of boundaries. The Gwadar port has become a hotly contested issue between China and the United States. Pakistan is in no position to upset either side. If the United States offers the lure of independence to the Baloch leadership, they would be happy to hand over Gwadar as well as some districts, say Kharan, for stationing American troops to control the region.
As things stand today, a dead Bugti is far more dangerous to the writ of the government than when he was alive. One could do business with him. His intransigence was calculated and diacritical. But now ...?
Two sons, one of whom would be a Sardar, survive Mr Bugti; but both lack his competence, stature or charisma and would not be able to carry forward his legacy. Senator Shahid Bugti, his son-in-law, may perhaps represent him, but only for a while, because he lacks tribal roots. People ask, what was Mr Bugti fighting for? The answer is implicit in the question. He was not asking for the moon. Once the state turned its guns on him, made him homeless and forced him to flee into the mountains, he was left with no choice but to present himself as a spokesman for the Balochi people and their rights, and put up a brave fight. The picture of the prickly proud Sardar sitting in a chair in front of a cave somewhere in the mountains would stick indelibly in the minds of the people. Sardar Atta Ullah Mengal and Khair Bukhsh Marri have kept a low profile. Mr Bugti articulated his views on provincial autonomy including the rights of the province to choose mega projects, which the federal government always boasted as its gift to the province, forgetting that the poor province of Balochistan has been subsidising gas all over the country for the last half-a-century.
The province is in a virtual state of occupation with about 100,000 Frontier Constabulary sleuths and army troops. The provincial government does not have any say whatsoever in any matter. It is usually selected by the establishment and installed through devious means. Most of the choices are incompetent and corrupt. Akbar Bugti was the best chief minister Balochistan had besides Mr Mengal; and about others, the less said the better.
What is ahead? What needs to be done? Instead of overcoming tribalism, the state has descended into tribalism. Nothing better illustrates the point than the end of the standoff between the ruler and the Nawab. The only answer is immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the armed forced from politics, the restoration of full and unguided democracy even if it throws up tribal leaders the military doesn’t like as members of assemblies, the thinning of troops in the province and the equitable as well as fair distribution of resources.
The greatest danger to the federation is the lack of provincial autonomy, and the greatest threat to provincial autonomy is the military, which rules the roost. Some people in the province holding a monopoly over patriotism glibly allege the leadership of smaller provinces of lacking patriotism. That is utter nonsense. The people of the smaller provinces are as patriotic, if not more, as anybody else in Pakistan.
Bugti’s death, particularly the circumstances surrounding it, has created a very dangerous situation, which only genuine representatives of the people can address. One has to read the newspapers to see that Balochistan has been crippled by strikes and violence. If immediate steps are not taken, we may live to rue the day. As the Americans say, “you ain't seen nothing yet.”
They hunted him down and killed him mercilessly. Circumstances are getting murkier by the day. Killing one’s own people and bowing before foreign powers make the pillar of our state policy. Nawab Akbar Bugti, even when he was an octogenarian, was a major political player. Balochistan is afire, and how long this fire will take to burn out is anybody’s guess. But the supreme ruler can congratulate himself that he has removed one-third of the impediments in the way of progress by taking care of one of the three sardars. Now Dera Bugti will march ahead into the 21st century.
I remember having met Mr Bugti for the first time in 1997 when I went to call on him after assuming the charge of the provincial chief secretary. It was on the chief minister’s advice that I had called on him. He received me very cordially at his residence in Quetta, which appeared to be a fortified and well-protected place. Even the streets were closed for reasons of security. He had a large number of enemies. We sat on the neatly-carpeted floor. We had about an hour’s conversation. I found him very articulate, forthright and candid. His was an impressive figure and his white hirsute face added to his almost royal bearing. He told me that before the provincial government agreed to my appointment, the federal government had sent three names including mine. Mr Ilahi Bukhsh Soomro called Mr Bugti asking him to choose Mr Hasan Bhutto, one of the panelists. Mr Bugti refused without a minute’s hesitation. When Mr Soomro insisted that the officer had great merit, Mr Bugti said he would never accept a Bhutto, whatever his merits. Mr Soomro assured him that he had no relation with the famous man, but Mr Bugti was not moved.
It was Nawaz Sharif’s government that had come with a heavy mandate at the Centre which showed a welcome change in the attitude towards smaller provinces. Unlike all his predecessors, Mr Sharif decided to take along with him the ‘nationalist leadership’. Mr Akhtar Mengal, who headed the coalition in the provincial assembly of which Mr Bugti was a part, was allowed to form the government despite misgivings in powerful quarters. Soon after, the coalition partners fell out on something or the other and Bugti and Mengal started a media war. Since I got frequent opportunities of meeting the chief minister, I advised him to hold his punches and not to get into something that could go beyond the point of no return. But Mengal, relatively a young man, insisted on confronting Bugti head-on because, according to him, Bugti was a bully and deserved to be treated as such. I told him that any rift in the coalition partners will help the insidious forces to play their dirty games and install someone incompetent and corrupt to do their bidding and represent them rather than the people of Balochistan. Not long afterwards the inevitable happened and the government was dismissed.
Mr Sharif, as soon as he assumed office, travelled all the way from Islamabad to Dera Bugti on prime minister’s jet along with important members of his government and some senior civil servants to call on Bugti. The gesture did not seem to impress Bugti much who appeared to take it into his stride. After all, this was not the first time that he had been wooed by the mighty and the powerful. The plane landed at the Jacobabad airport and one was surprised that Mr Bugti was not waiting at the tarmac to receive the prime minister. The delegation then boarded the helicopter and took off for Dera Bugti. There was no Mr Bugti to receive the prime minister even at the helipad. The delegation then drove to the Bugti House. He was not there even at the outside gate. It was only after the prime minister and his delegation had entered the house that Mr Bugti emerged to receive him at the entrance to the hall, which was to be the venue of the meeting. The delegation was made to sit in the Balochi tradition on the floor and everyone could share the company of the prime minister and Mr Bugti. For a few minutes the two men went to a separate room to talk. Lunch was served and since Mr Bugti ate very spicy meals, he served the guests the same kind of food. Those who were careful chose to pass up the dishes and relied on yogurt and bread to avoid unpleasant consequences.
Before lunch was served, Mr Bugti called one of his underlings to bring a present for the prime minister. This looked like an ordinary stick and was perhaps hand-carved. Mr Bugti ordered his underling to present the stick to the prime minister that he graciously accepted. The chief minister told me afterwards that Mr Bugti’s gesture violated the traditional Balochi courtesy because not personally handing over the present to the prime minister implied that he treated him not on a par with himself, but at a level lower than himself. Otherwise in the Balochi tradition, if he had treated the prime minister as his equal, he would have presented the carved stick with his own hand. That was Bugti, arrogance incarnate.
When he resigned as governor of Balochistan, he did not address Mr Bhutto as prime minister. Mr Sher Baz Mazari has quoted in his book, A Journey to Disillusionment, an instance: when Bhutto visited him at the Governor’s House and showed some annoyance at children playing on the lawn, Bugti ignored the protest and told the prime minister that it was natural for children to play.
Mr Bugti was a very canny character and a tough negotiator. He knew better than any Baloch sardar how to squeeze his opponent to the limit. The Pakistan Petroleum Limited running Sui Gas fields and the OGDCL running some other wells in the area were made to pay through their nose for their presence in those areas either in terms of rent/lease for the land or the employees who had to be given jobs. Some agreements between Mr Bugti and the OGDCL read like treaties between two sovereign entities. His demands easily qualified as extortion.
Mr Sharif, known to be a man in great hurry, wished to make some amendments to the Constitution for which he had the necessary numbers in the National Assembly, but not in the Senate. Mr Bugti had five senators and so did the MQM. The need for these 10 votes acquired special significance whenever an amendment had to be carried through — and that too in a hurry. The provincial government was totally helpless in ensuring the presence of Mr Bugti’s senators in Islamabad. His five senators would hide and prove to be elusive and inaccessible unless some personal representative of the prime minister had spoken to Mr Bugti and fulfilled his demands; most of them relating to payments which Mr Bugti thought were due to him. Not unlike the World Bank, which has begun insisting on compliance of conditionalities upfront before signing a loan, he wanted payment upfront. Some deputy secretary of Finance Department would travel from Islamabad carrying loads of cash before Bugti ordered his henchmen to travel to Islamabad and vote appropriately.
Mr Bugti was a shrewd man. He also knew his limits. Therefore, before he died, he made it known that a standoff between him and General Pervez Musharaff could be resolved on the basis of proposals made by a committee constituted by the regime. But General Musharraf wanted his precise location in the mountains so as to establish the writ of his government. This he seems to have accomplished by executing Bugti in a military operation involving ground troops, helicopter gunship, missiles and whatever, including satellite monitoring of his presence.
Balochistan is at a standstill; Quetta is under curfew; flights have been cancelled; and rail and road links cut off; university hostels have been vacated; hundreds of students arrested; and property worth millions of rupees damaged. Writ indeed!
Akbar Bugti’s death may provide satisfaction to some vengeful souls, but they know not what is afoot. Mr Bugti may be guilty of many crimes, including murders, but he died a brave man fighting, and has left an indelible mark on the psyche of the people of Balochistan as a leader who fought for their rights against a exploitative establishment. He is a Shaheed in the popular sense and every political leader of Balochistan will have to champion his cause under his rubric and in his name. He ranks next to the Mari Nawab in tribal hierarchy, but his political standing has now surpassed all others.
The future is frighteningly bleak. The situation is reminiscent of 1971 when a military junta was confronting the combined might of public opinion in a particular province only to avoid transferring power to the people.
A turbulent Balochistan hardly suits the United States, which is fighting its war ‘against terror’ in this region by occupying Afghanistan through Nato forces. The statement of the American government spokesman that it “would like to see the Balochistan dispute settled within the framework of strong and united Pakistan” is ominous. Declassified US papers bear close resemblance to the US government position on East Pakistan. The outcome is there for everyone to see. They had Gen Yahya Khan provide Henry Kissinger a safe passage to China and here we have another general fighting their war on terror. Americans are never very squeamish about principles, least of all about democracy.
Balochistan may have slipped out of hand and it is not unlikely that gas supply to the cities of Pakistan may suddenly be disrupted with the government feeling totally helpless.
In such circumstances the United States might have to dust off some of the think-tank reports proposing realignment of boundaries. The Gwadar port has become a hotly contested issue between China and the United States. Pakistan is in no position to upset either side. If the United States offers the lure of independence to the Baloch leadership, they would be happy to hand over Gwadar as well as some districts, say Kharan, for stationing American troops to control the region.
As things stand today, a dead Bugti is far more dangerous to the writ of the government than when he was alive. One could do business with him. His intransigence was calculated and diacritical. But now ...?
Two sons, one of whom would be a Sardar, survive Mr Bugti; but both lack his competence, stature or charisma and would not be able to carry forward his legacy. Senator Shahid Bugti, his son-in-law, may perhaps represent him, but only for a while, because he lacks tribal roots. People ask, what was Mr Bugti fighting for? The answer is implicit in the question. He was not asking for the moon. Once the state turned its guns on him, made him homeless and forced him to flee into the mountains, he was left with no choice but to present himself as a spokesman for the Balochi people and their rights, and put up a brave fight. The picture of the prickly proud Sardar sitting in a chair in front of a cave somewhere in the mountains would stick indelibly in the minds of the people. Sardar Atta Ullah Mengal and Khair Bukhsh Marri have kept a low profile. Mr Bugti articulated his views on provincial autonomy including the rights of the province to choose mega projects, which the federal government always boasted as its gift to the province, forgetting that the poor province of Balochistan has been subsidising gas all over the country for the last half-a-century.
The province is in a virtual state of occupation with about 100,000 Frontier Constabulary sleuths and army troops. The provincial government does not have any say whatsoever in any matter. It is usually selected by the establishment and installed through devious means. Most of the choices are incompetent and corrupt. Akbar Bugti was the best chief minister Balochistan had besides Mr Mengal; and about others, the less said the better.
What is ahead? What needs to be done? Instead of overcoming tribalism, the state has descended into tribalism. Nothing better illustrates the point than the end of the standoff between the ruler and the Nawab. The only answer is immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the armed forced from politics, the restoration of full and unguided democracy even if it throws up tribal leaders the military doesn’t like as members of assemblies, the thinning of troops in the province and the equitable as well as fair distribution of resources.
The greatest danger to the federation is the lack of provincial autonomy, and the greatest threat to provincial autonomy is the military, which rules the roost. Some people in the province holding a monopoly over patriotism glibly allege the leadership of smaller provinces of lacking patriotism. That is utter nonsense. The people of the smaller provinces are as patriotic, if not more, as anybody else in Pakistan.
Bugti’s death, particularly the circumstances surrounding it, has created a very dangerous situation, which only genuine representatives of the people can address. One has to read the newspapers to see that Balochistan has been crippled by strikes and violence. If immediate steps are not taken, we may live to rue the day. As the Americans say, “you ain't seen nothing yet.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)