The Baluchistan Issue

re:#96 by nangaparbat
Sorry for a late reply to your post.
I do not wish Pak should ever go through a 1971 like situation which would not be in India`s interest either but there are some signs that this is starting to happen in Baluchistan. At least some signposts are visible.
For any insurgency or freedom struggle (eg tamil struggle in Srilanka, Kashmiri struggle for more freedom in India, Bangladeshi struggle in the past), some conditions need to be met:
1. There should be a large population that sees freedom from oppression as the only way. In case of Tamil militancy in Srilanka, Tamils in that country felt totally alienated and subjugated by the majority Sinhala population. Ditto for Bangladesh. Has the disenchantment of the Baluchs reached a critical mass? I am not sure.
2. There is a need for an ideology or a distinct culture/language/religion with which the disenchanted population strongly identify with. In case of Tamils, it was their language. Ditto for Bangladeshis. For Kashmiris, it started out as ``Kashmiriyat`` but has gotten more complicated after miltancy invaded the valley. Does a seperate identity exist for Baluchs? I think it does.
3. A strong, popular leadership which can give a political shape to the struggle. Such a leadership existed with Mujibur Rehman in 1971. There is lack of strong leadership among Kashmiris and Baluchs. I am not sure if V.Prabhakaran can be called a popular leader even among the Tamils of Srilanka. He is no doubt strong and is much feared but is he also popular in a benign sort of way? I am not sure.
Pakistan need to find ways of dispersing powers to smaller units so that they can take care of their own destinies. Will the dictator of Pak have the sense to realize that he, despite good intensions, is hurting his country? He needs to usher in democracy and give up his dictatorial powers. AS this is not going to happen, it remains to be seen how the political scene in Baluchistan is going to unfold in future.
Sridhar

excerpts from a letter from the Dawn


`` For example, gas was discovered at Sui in 1952 but Quetta received gas connections in the 1980s. Even today, 94 per cent of Balochistan`s population has no gas supply. Besides, the province, which produces the commodity, receives the lowest rate of royalty than the other provinces. ``

May be HisExcellency should lobby the Pakistani government to correct this problem.

HP #109

“How does Baluchistan rely on rest of Pakistan ?”

`` First, there is no other buyer of the natural gas.
80% of Balochistan has power connections. Power comes from Punjab and Sindh.
Fishing Industry on Makran coast is entirely depended on Karachi and Sindh for buyers.
Gidiani in Balochistan is the only Ship breaking area in Pakistan. Most of the capital comes from Karachi but it provides employment.
Gawadar(not now) Pisni and Jiwani are port of entry of smuggled goods in to Pakistan.
Karachi and Sindh have more Baloch working there than in Balochistan and part of wages go to Balochistan.
HUB(name of the place) Dam is a source of water and power supply to Karachi and it is located in Balochistan which gathers revenue and employment thru the Dam.``

Duh. Baluchistan could sell natural gas to anyone who pays them hard currency ? I bet it is a lot more than the royalties Pakistan pays them now.

What is the electricity for ? The total amount must be 500-600 MW. It is not like Baluchistan has a massive industrial base of any sort.

`` First, there is no civil war in Pakistan and chances of that happening are non-existent. Second, my point was that countries exist despite non-developed political institutions. Burma and Somalia despite many problems still exist.``

These kind of confrontations are close to a civil war or a rebellion.

“Iran is in a better position than it was ever before in history.”

`` That is up for grabs. The current Iran regime may not last more than two years against the expected US onslaught. ``

The Iranian regime of mullahs may be in trouble. But Iranian people have a bright future. Given the current quagmire in Iraq US cannot mount a ground assault against Iran. The only option is air strikes. Air strikes against Iran are risky given Iranian oil exports, Iranian influence over some Shites in Iraq etc.

#107 by bbabu

“How does Baluchistan rely on rest of Pakistan ?”

First, there is no other buyer of the natural gas.
80% of Balochistan has power connections. Power comes from Punjab and Sindh.
Fishing Industry on Makran coast is entirely depended on Karachi and Sindh for buyers.
Gidiani in Balochistan is the only Ship breaking area in Pakistan. Most of the capital comes from Karachi but it provides employment.
Gawadar(not now) Pisni and Jiwani are port of entry of smuggled goods in to Pakistan.
Karachi and Sindh have more Baloch working there than in Balochistan and part of wages go to Balochistan.
HUB(name of the place) Dam is a source of water and power supply to Karachi and it is located in Balochistan which gathers revenue and employment thru the Dam.

“If you do not have political institutions to resolve these problems Pakistan is going to be an unstable state.”

Political institutions take time to develop and that is a weakness in Pakistan structure.

“Internal civil wars have undermined Burma, Somalia, a lot of countries in West Africa”

First, there is no civil war in Pakistan and chances of that happening are non-existent. Second, my point was that countries exist despite non-developed political institutions. Burma and Somalia despite many problems still exist.

“Iran is in a better position than it was ever before in history.”

That is up for grabs. The current Iran regime may not last more than two years against the expected US onslaught.

#106 by HP

*****
The Iran connection in Balochistan has no legs.
*****

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_26-1-2005_pg1_4

The Daily Times, Lahore, Pakistan
Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Balochistan’s troubles: CM does not rule out Iranian involvement

ISLAMABAD: Mir Jam Muhammad Yousaf, the Balochistan chief minister, has said he will not rule out the possibility that Iran or an extremist group is behind the recent disturbances in the province.

Talking to a private television, the chief minister said he suspected that either Iran, Al Qaeda or another foreign power or extremist groups opposed to the government’s policies could have been involved in the recent attacks by tribesmen on gas installations in Sui.

A report in the Sunday Telegraph claimed Pakistani officials believed Iran was instigating an insurgency in Balochistan, but the Foreign Office has denied the report, saying it blames no foreign power for events in the province and has a very good relationship with Iran.

Yousaf said there was no military operation in progress in the province and the government had no plans to launch one either. He said security forces were only there to guard natural gas installations in Sui.

Tribal chiefs have said the attacks were sparked by public outrage at the alleged gang rape of a woman doctor by army personnel, but Yousaf said the incident had sparked no such public outrage. He said many women in other parts of the country had been subjected to such crimes, but never had there been such a reaction.

He said soon after getting wind of the crime, the provincial government was ready to take action against the alleged rapists, but Pakistan Petroleum Limited authorities denied police permission to question the victim. online

HP #106

`` You are trying to script too many loose scenarios. Weaving thru even one of them would take at least three posts each. I will generally address your post.
Most of what you put forward as country breaking scenarios are actually very simple things and probably have no implications on the over all integrity of Pakistan.
First, the current Pakistan is now one geographical entity, second, it is integrated economically and all provinces rely on each other for resources and like many other countries including India several regions would always fight each other on different issues starting from water to power usage etc. these things are part of inherent give and take that goes on different state levels including assemblies and Senates and even in the cabinet itself.``

How does Baluchistan rely on rest of Pakistan ?

If you do not have political institutions to resolve these problems Pakistan is going to be an unstable state.

`` The problem that Pakistan has is that it has failed to establish a political system. Not establishing a political system itself does not break a country apart. It has not happened in the modern history. There are other factors that break a country. Such as foreign intervention or defeat in a war.``

Internal civil wars have undermined Burma, Somalia, a lot of countries in West Africa

`` There are only two forces in the current world that can break Pakistan apart. Both these forces are so massive that Pakistan cannot fight them on different levels. The US and India are the only two countries in the world that can damage Pakistan’s integrity and they too will have to rely on physical forces to do that.
At this time both India and the US have no interest in moving chains from Torkham to Attock.``


`` It appears to me and I am not gonna bet anything on that right now that the US is pushing Pakistan to take over the same role that Shah of Iran had in the 70s. There are several problems with that and my fear is that Pakistan Army would accept that role thus creating permanent enemies on several fronts. The Afghan government cannot survive with out support from Pakistan and eventually the US would let Pakistan be the tutelage power for Afghanistan or at least the Pushtoon speaking parts of Afghanistan.``

What is the problem with being a policemen for Uncle Sam ? I would do it if the price was right.

`` The Iran connection in Balochistan has no legs. The Wash Times article is part of the US campaign to build the case against Iran. Iran has been so much in trouble with the US and it is so much tied down in Iraq that Iran would not open another front on its back against Pakistan. The reality is that Baloch have always looked at Iran with suspicion and it would be hard for them to bat for Iran now.``

Iran is in a better position than it was ever before in history. Saddam is history. Iraqi Shites will gain power in Iraq. Pakistan has been booted out of Afghanistan. Saudi monarchy is in a defensive mode over Osama Bin laden. Saudi-US relations are under severe strain. Oil prices are going higher. Neighbors like Azerbaijan, Turkmentstan are too weak to pose any threat to Iran.

Short of a US military occupation Iran is going to get nukes in 3-5 years.

`` Don’t look too much in the current melee in Balochistan. It is a persistent problem, which occurs every year when the Pak govt and Baloch Sardars go in dispute over the royalty. ``

At some point Baluchis will demand their pound of flesh over the natural gas.

#104 by nangaparbat

Salim,
You are trying to script too many loose scenarios. Weaving thru even one of them would take at least three posts each. I will generally address your post.
Most of what you put forward as country breaking scenarios are actually very simple things and probably have no implications on the over all integrity of Pakistan.
First, the current Pakistan is now one geographical entity, second, it is integrated economically and all provinces rely on each other for resources and like many other countries including India several regions would always fight each other on different issues starting from water to power usage etc. these things are part of inherent give and take that goes on different state levels including assemblies and Senates and even in the cabinet itself.
The problem that Pakistan has is that it has failed to establish a political system. Not establishing a political system itself does not break a country apart. It has not happened in the modern history. There are other factors that break a country. Such as foreign intervention or defeat in a war.
There are only two forces in the current world that can break Pakistan apart. Both these forces are so massive that Pakistan cannot fight them on different levels. The US and India are the only two countries in the world that can damage Pakistan’s integrity and they too will have to rely on physical forces to do that.
At this time both India and the US have no interest in moving chains from Torkham to Attock.
It appears to me and I am not gonna bet anything on that right now that the US is pushing Pakistan to take over the same role that Shah of Iran had in the 70s. There are several problems with that and my fear is that Pakistan Army would accept that role thus creating permanent enemies on several fronts. The Afghan government cannot survive with out support from Pakistan and eventually the US would let Pakistan be the tutelage power for Afghanistan or at least the Pushtoon speaking parts of Afghanistan.
The Iran connection in Balochistan has no legs. The Wash Times article is part of the US campaign to build the case against Iran. Iran has been so much in trouble with the US and it is so much tied down in Iraq that Iran would not open another front on its back against Pakistan. The reality is that Baloch have always looked at Iran with suspicion and it would be hard for them to bat for Iran now.
Having said that, the US already has bases in Balochistan and is pushing Pakistan to build more bases there, Baloch Sardars would try and extract maximum benefits from the Pak Army and the US and stay away from Iran altogether.
Don’t look too much in the current melee in Balochistan. It is a persistent problem, which occurs every year when the Pak govt and Baloch Sardars go in dispute over the royalty.

#97 and #104 by nangaparbat

Salim,

Excellent Posts.

nangaparbat #100

`` You may be right. However, one group we are all ignoring is the MMA and their massive support throughout NWFP, Baluchistan, and even Karachi. They are just waiting for the military and secularists to fight it out and they are ready to move in and fill the vacuum. Because almost all the benefits of US aid and grants are going directly to Punjab, and the other three provinces are destitute, there is a good chance of violence breaking out against the army in all three provinces, simulataneously. I hope it doesn`t happen but events do have a way of working rapidly in Pakistan once violence starts.``

Depending on how you look at it the MMA is a proxy or a escape valve for the Pakistani Army. They serve the purpose of undercutting mainstream political groups like the PPP and PML and ethnic parties like the ANP and Baluchi groups. It helps the Pakistani Army co-opt Islamic militants with one hand while the other hand is helping USA to catch Al Qaida and Taliban activists. If the MMA loses the support of the generals they will cease to be effective in NWFP and Baluchistan.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

From the Washington Times a right wing publication in the USA

Pakistan assails Iran over growing Baluch insurgency
By Massoud Ansari
LONDON SUNDAY TELEGRAPH

KARACHI, Pakistan — Pakistan has blamed Iran for fueling a growing insurgency in Baluchistan, the strategically sensitive province where militant tribesmen have launched a series of terrorist attacks in recent weeks.
Senior government officials say Iran is encouraging ``intruders`` from within its own Baluch community to cross the 550-mile border with the Pakistani province and give support to the rebels.
``All this violence is a part of a greater conspiracy,`` a senior Pakistani government official said. ``These militants would not be challenging the government so openly without the backup of a foreign hand.``
Pakistan`s support would be essential for any U.S.-led action against Iran, whose fundamentalist Muslim regime was last week put firmly in the sights of the second Bush administration by Vice President Dick Cheney. ``You look around the world at potential trouble spots — Iran is right at the top of the list,`` Mr. Cheney said.
Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency set up a unit in the provincial capital, Quetta, last year to monitor suspected Iranian activity in Baluchistan. Officials say that in addition to directly supporting the insurgency, Tehran`s state-controlled radio has launched a propaganda campaign against Islamabad.
``Radio Tehran broadcasts between 90 and 100 minutes of programs every day which carry propaganda against the Pakistan government,`` said a former interior minister. He added that Iran was suspected of providing financial, logistical and moral backing for the insurgency.
Iran is said to be taking advantage of unrest among tribesmen who claim to have been denied the benefits of Baluchistan`s natural-gas fields.
Earlier this month, rebels disrupted gas production in a series of rocket and mortar attacks, which killed eight persons. However, Islamabad is delaying a formal complaint to Tehran in the hope that private diplomatic channels may prove more effective. Meanwhile, large numbers of troops are hunting rebels in the province.
Pakistani officials believe that Tehran — already furious at Pakistan`s support for the U.S.-led war on terrorism — has stepped up its activity in Baluchistan because of its anger at the construction of a vast deep-water port at Gwadar, close to the border, which it fears could be used by Washington as a base for monitoring and infiltrating Iran.
Washington believes Iran is pursuing an advanced nuclear-weapons program in addition to sponsoring international terrorism, and has repeatedly accused Tehran of fomenting trouble within Iraq.
Last week, journalist Seymour Hersh reported in the New Yorker that U.S. special forces had carried out recent reconnaissance missions inside Iran to identify nuclear, chemical and missile sites that could be targeted. Although the Bush administration brushed aside the claims, the report heightened the belief that the United States might be preparing to take action.

Re: # 101
bbabu,
The article from the Washington Times that you posted relfects the growing schism between Pakistan and Iran. The latter has been growing incrasingly concerned about the frequent killings of Shias in Sunni-dominated Pakistan. Previously, under Pakistan`s ISI-supported Taliban regime in Aghanistan, thousands of Shias were summarily massacred by the right-wing Sunni Wahabbi Taliban regime. With the pogroms against Shias in Punjab and Karachi, Iran is now playing its trump card - Baluchistan.

Of course, the 180 degree U-turn by Pakistan in persecuting its former allies, the Taliban and Al-Quaida terrorists, has added a free-for-all atmosphere to the quasi-religious wars in western Pakistan. I think that the clampdown on the Sunni right-wing elements was always a facade meant to placate an impatient Washington and to draw maximum US aid for the cash-strapped economy of Pakistan. The alliance between Sunni right-wingers and the Pakistan army is very old, dating back to the Zia regime. It was meant to keep the secularists in check while prolonging army rule. The secularists themselves are nothing more than a hodge-podge of played out feudals backing either BB or Nawaz Sharif. Some have found it politically convenient and economically-advatageous to join Mushy`s Muslim League.

The picture that is emerging is one of confusion and musical chairs. You have the pro-Taliban NWFP with support from Pathan elements of the Pak Army, the Baluchi nationalists with backing from Iran, Mohajir nationalists in Karachi and Hyderabad backed by industrialists in that teeming city, and some say Indian backing also, the Sindhi nationalists backing the PPP, and lastly the most powerful feudals in Punjab with backing from the Mushy Government, the Muslim League, and the bulk of the Punjabi elements of the Pak Army. The PPP has been largely sidelined in the Punjab as has been the Nawaz Muslim League. There is great animosity between the MQM and the religous right. While they may appear to be similar, there is an unbridgeable gap between the PPP/Nawaz Muslim League elements and the MQM because of the bloodshed from the 80s and 90s. MQM will play the religious right against the secularists and claim Karachi/Hyderabad after these two have fought it out. The Army will have to split along Pathan/Punjabi lines if the rift between MMA and Army Government is not resolved soon. The pressure is building and hopefully cooler heads can prevail to avoid a full-fledged bloodbath in Pakistan. Nuclear weapons, developed by the Mohajir Dr. A. Q. Khan, did not necessarily bring peace and safety to Pakistan. This is a nightmare that is rapidly developing into reality. God help the poor people of Pakistan.

nangaparbat #98

`` The support for Pakistan in 1940s was genuine as is the disaffection with that nation among the people on the periphery of the power establishment in Pakistan, right from its inception. Bengalis were the foremost supporters of Pakistan as were the Mohajirs, without whose support the young country would have died in infancy. The shameful usurpation of all civilian power by Punjabis, though their paramount position in the armed forces, was the catalyst that brought Pakistan to ruin. It was dismembered in 1971 and the dark clouds of secession are covering the three disgruntled provinces today. Playing the role of the bully has gotten Punjab large gains in development, industries, and infrastructure. It may also make it a lank-locked country like Nepal and Afghanistan. ``

I do not think there is any imminent danger of breakup in pakistan. I think these ethnic grievances undermine political stability and reduce economic development which reinforce the original grievances. At some point in the future there is a real good chance that it would lead to secession. It is a vicious cycle. I think the Pakistani Army has to make peace with India, shut down militant groups operating in Kashmir and Afghanistan and reduce its share of the national budget to reverse this trend. For all of his faults Musharraf has made some moves in this direction. It is almost like his heart and his head don`t go in tandem.

Re: # 99
bbabu,
{``I do not think there is any imminent danger of breakup in pakistan. ``}

You may be right. However, one group we are all ignoring is the MMA and their massive support throughout NWFP, Baluchistan, and even Karachi. They are just waiting for the military and secularists to fight it out and they are ready to move in and fill the vacuum. Because almost all the benefits of US aid and grants are going directly to Punjab, and the other three provinces are destitute, there is a good chance of violence breaking out against the army in all three provinces, simulataneously. I hope it doesn`t happen but events do have a way of working rapidly in Pakistan once violence starts.

The dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971 changed the rules of the game as far as Kashmir is concerned. What was feasible and defensible in 1948 could not be justified in 1971 and therefore cannot be taken as gospel in 2005. While one can argue that Pakistan (the former West Pakistan, or in the future the lone remaining province of Punjab) is the sole heir for Muslims to the partition plan of 1946-47, the case for such an argument is not that crystal clear. Pakistan, now (and Punjab, even less, in the future) may represent less than one-third of the total number of Muslims in the sub-continent. What right can 30% of the people have to make a decision for the much larger majority. India is home to more Muslims than either Pakistan or Bangladesh. Don`t the Indian Muslims get to decide if one of their provinces should go to Pakistan or become independent? What would be the status of these Indian Muslims if Kashmir were to become part of Pakistan? Not only would they become fewer in numbers, but their own position would go from fifth columnists to maybe even worse. I, of course, do not want to think purely in religious terms and religious numbers. I am merely doing this because such perverted logic was used in the TNT to dismember India at the expense of the Indian Muslims, Sikhs, and those Hindus who found themselves in Pakistan.
A nation, founded on religious zeal, and functioning on the age-old provincial, ethnic, tribal, and linguistic lines of separation is bound to fall apart on those very lines.

Romair #85

`` Any community can back any kind of separatists. But for that to happen, two things have to exist. First their has to be an indigenous separatist movements. Second there has to be a reason for the other country to back the separatists. In Kashmir both these reasons exist. Just like in East Pakistan, they existed. Neither exists in Baluchistan. There is no separatist movement. Nor does Iran have any reason to back a separatist movement, if it existed.``

There is a latent separatist movement among Paktoons, Baluchis and Sindhis. What does Baluchis get from being within Pakistan ? If Baluchistan has those natural gas reserves they can sell the natural gas to any external player in return for hard cash. As long as Pakistani government does not pay them the royalties they deserve there will be discontent. It is a matter of time before discontent turns to separatism. After all Bengalis were pretty enthusiatic boosters for Pakistan in 1947. It did not take long before they wanted out. 24 years is a short time frame in history. Mohajhir support in creation of Pakistan did not prevent MQM-govt showdown.

`` Can you tell me exactly why they would launch an attack? What would be the motivation? Why would the people of Iran be interested in attacking Pakistan? What would they gain from it? Countries don`t just attack each other for fun. And even with nukes, India threatened to attack but did not. Why would Iran, with a military much smaller than India`s attack? ``

I never said Iran would attack Pakistan. All I said that they can back separatists or they can use the threat of support for Baluchi separartism to influence Pakistani government policy. Items on Iran`s agenda could include support for Taliban, any pipeline from Central Asia to Pakistan, Pakistani military co-operation with UAE/Saudi Arabia/Oman, co-operation with USA, Pakistani state support for ant-Shite groups etc. I never said the clerics in Teharan are entirely rational.

Keep in mind Iranian state makes $20 bi in petroluem reveneues plus potentially several billion in natural gas revenues. That is four times the Pakistani government budget. Financially it is no brainer as to who can sustain a longer war.

`` Can you name any nuclear country that has been attacked? Border skirmishes and all out attacks are two different things. Why didn`t India attack Pakistan when it had its forces piled on the border. Why did it back down? India has a 5-1 advantage in military budget. But it still did not attack. It was a nuclear deterent that stopped India.``

I am sure this kind of mentality will lead Pakistan to a limited or all out nuclear war. Unfortunately you may have to worry about other countries in addition to India.