The Baloch National Question
Introduction
National
Question is a major issue in the contemporary world, especially in the context of
a post-colonial and post-Soviet era. Baloch is amongst the largest stateless nations
in the world. Their homeland, Balochistan divided by the powerful forces of
history, lies within the present day borders of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.
In post-colonial multi-ethnic countries, the ascendancy to power by one
specific ethnic group over another tended to occur at the expense of minority
nationality through the minimization of political and economic opportunities. Hostilities
arise among the constituent nationalities of a multi-national state from
deep-rooted socio-economic and political-cultural grievances. The redundancy of
religion as a binding force among different nationalities in Pakistani context
had become obvious by many events in the turbulent history of this country. It has
become quite obvious that superfluous Islamic Pakistani nationalism did not
serve as a means of awakening of Pakistani masses to national consciousness. If
Pakistan wants a democratic solution to the Baloch question, she must
imperatively amend radically her fundamental perception with a new paradigm based
on the basic principles of autonomy, democracy and secularism. The present
era of liberalism, tolerance, human rights and right of self-determination, which
has been proclaimed by United Nations as a fundamental right to all peoples
without any constraints or limitations, has
brought new hopes for the long suffering Baloch people. For many, a sovereign
and united Balochistan could be a stabilizing factor in the unstable and
chaotic atmosphere created by Islamic fundamentalists and chauvinists in Central
and South Asia.
Dynamics of Post -colonial Nationalism
In
a broader context, in Asia and Africa, the emergence of national struggles was
due to unnatural national boundaries in which geographic ethnic and cultural
entities were ignored while forming or reforming states by colonial masters in
19th and 20th centuries. Many ancient peoples got
themselves separated in many countries. Hence, these nationalities are exerting
pressure for territorial revision with the object of uniting the people of same
racial, linguistic and cultural origin by creating new national states.
The
territorial states emerged in 19th and 20th centuries, began
their cultural-political hegemony in the form of establishing of institutions
dominated by majority nationality, designed for greater integration, and
eventual assimilation of all national minorities living within the confines of
a modern state thus diminishing minority national identities into
sub-categories. For members of marginalized national entities the burning issues
of territorial demarcation is but responses to state expansion and encroachment
into social and economic spheres. As Johnston put it “Nationalism is
essentially a form of alternate alignment that is shaped as a counter movement
to the established state order; a counter movement that views nationalism as a
strategy that responds in a territorial and political manner to processes of
state expansion.”
In
multi-ethnic countries, the majority nationality or nationalities generally
keep out the minority in power structure.
According to Smith, when a people
see itself disenfranchised or excluded from power structures, more often than
not (especially if the perceived treatment is seen to be based on ethnic lines)
a consolidation of purpose that is diametrically opposed to the centre is
formed on the periphery. In many cases the existing state may in itself be
viewed by the ethnic minorities as the “enemy”. The minority nationalist
opposition can seek to break away from the union. Thus hostility arises among
the constituent nationalities of a multi-national state from deep-rooted
socio-economic and political-cultural grievances which, minority feels, cannot
be redressed by any normal political means. The forms and dimensions of ethnic
enmity however depend upon the nature of polity and the power and position of
the threatened group vis-à-vis the dominant nationality.
What
are the main apprehensions that particularly infuriate a national minority and
cause their alienation? A minority is discontented because it is not allowed
the right to use its native language. It is aggrieved when it does not enjoy
liberty of conscience and of movement. A
minority is disenchanted because it does not own or possess its resources. It
is disillusioned when they are exploited economically and in the process is kept
away from power composition of the state.
‘Of
all human feelings, the strongest, the mightiest and the deepest are the
national feeling.’ This thought of Lenin’s, best expresses the great importance
of national feeling in the lives of all peoples. A nation is a stable
community, is historically formed on the basis of a common language, territory,
economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture. Nationalism
is the feeling of kinship, created as a result of an enlightened vision of
common history. According to sociologists like Ernest Renan, a nation is a soul
constituted by two things. One lies in the past, one in the present. One is the
possession in common of a rich legacy of memories; the other is present day
consent-- the desire to live together, the will to perpetuate the value of the
heritage that one has received in an undivided form. A nation is therefore a
large-scale solidarity, constituted by the feeling of sacrifices that one has
made in the past and of those that one is prepared to make in future for common
good of its constituents.
The
right of self-determination was formulated by European philosophers after the
Renaissance, and then proclaimed by the Founding Fathers of America and by the
French Revolution. The United Nations has proclaimed this right in many
covenants and solemn resolutions as a fundamental right to all peoples without
any constraints or limitations. This signifies equal rights of nations as an
essential element in answer to the national question. The right of
self-determination means that only the nation itself has the right to determine
its destiny: that no one has the right to forcibly interfere in the life of the
nation, to destroy its institutions, to violate its habits and customs, to
repress its language, or curtail its economic rights. The right of self-determination means that a nation may organize
its collective life in the way it wishes.
It has the freedom to enter into federal or con-federal relations with
other nations and the right to complete secession. The conception aims to put
an end to the policy of national oppression, thereby removing basic causes of
strife amongst nations.
The
national questions in South Asia as in the other parts of the world do not fall
into a monolithic category: what distinguish the differences between them is
historical, cultural, economic and geographical. In the
context of Baloch National Question, the theoretical formation and existence of
present territorial states in post-colonial Asia and Africa is essential for
deriving conclusions in its proper socio-cultural, historical, political and
geographical perspective.
Tracing Baloch Aspirations
One
of the ancient inhabitants of central Caspian region, the Baloch trace their
national identity as a tribal union for the first time in connection with their
military support to forces of Iranian Monarch, Cyrus (546-529 BC) against the
Medes. References by Arab and Persian chroniclers to a Koch-o-Baloch and their
hold on major areas of Kerman and Seistan as far as the sea signify that these
tribes had a political and administrative structure with a centralized
authority which forged alliances with other tribes as well as with rulers of
Persia and the Indus valley. The first conflict with the Persians after their
alliance with Cyrus has been recorded during the reign of Anushervan around 531
AD. The Persian military might was brought on the Baloch with large scale
massacres. Baloch relations with Persia
since Anushervan have never been cordial. They have been fighting them
intermittently for the last fifteen hundred years. In late 1920s Mir Dost
Muhammad Khan’s attempt to create an independent Balochistan proved abortive.
For the past several decades the Persians never hesitated to use force against the
Baloch.
Numbering
over 15 million, the Baloch is one of the largest non-state nations in the
present world. After a series of massive migrations due to historical events,
the Baloch finally settled in the present day boundaries of Balochistan although
many Baloch tribes could be found in Pakistani provinces of Punjab and Sindh. A
small number has been settled in Gujrat in India. Their homeland is divided amongst Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran.
The greatest number lives in Pakistan, though a significant number of Baloch
are living in Diaspora. For centuries, the Baloch, with its distinctive culture
has had to confront all centralizing, and ethnically-based nationalist regimes
of the host states which have little or no tolerance for expressions of Baloch national
autonomy within their borders.
From
16th to mid-19th century, much of
Balochistan was under the rule of independent and autonomous Baloch tribal
principalities. The first Baloch ruler in 17th century was Naseer
Khan Ahmed-zai. The Baloch political standing was changed radically in later
decades, when the British and Persian empires divided Balochistan into spheres
of influences, agreeing on an artificial border in 19th century,
between British Empire in India and Persian Kingdom. The still controversial
Durand line gave a significant chunk of Baloch territory to the buffer state of
Afghanistan. In the West the Goldsmith line gave a large portion of Baloch land
to Iran. The Anglo-Afghan wars and subsequent events in Persia in respect of
“great game” played between Czarist Russia and British Empire further marginalized
the Baloch and compromised their national sovereignty.
The
first Baloch national conference at Jacobabad in 1932 was amongst the basic events
that continued to shape the nationalist struggle until the end of 20th
century. In spite the diversity of struggle in the 20th century, the
fight was for a purely nationalist agenda aiming to replace foreign rule by a
native rule.
Fighting Baloch Nationalism
Balochistan
went through three armed conflicts since its forcible merger with Pakistan. The
first was in 1948. Later events in 1958, and 1974 were extra parliamentary
reactions of an ethnic nationality perceiving the threat of subjugation. Although
the central government’s political and economic incursions into the province
triggered off the conflicts, the root cause lay in the unfulfilled national aspirations
of the Baloch for an independent sovereign status of their own. After annexation of the Kalat confederacy in
1948, which led to a short-lived uprising, successive Pakistani ruling elite
had perceived Baloch nationalism as a grave threat to the state’s suzerainty.
The incident that strengthened the center’s threat perception in later
years was the abortive attempt of the Khan of Kalat to convene a meeting of the
Baloch Sardars in 1958 to work out plans to consolidate a Baloch state. The Pakistani
establishment responded with oppressive measures. Discrimination against them in
government services and allocation of developmental funds to the province, the
state-aided settlement of Punjabis and Afghan immigrants during and after
Afghan conflict with Soviet Union, in the Baloch areas in order to bring about
a demographic change, exploitative attitude in harnessing natural resources, and
systematic endeavors for cultural hegemony all led to a sense of relative
deprivation and political disenchantment in Baloch society.
Language
which is undoubtedly the main carrier of ideas, sentiments, traditions, customs
and religious dogma from one generation to another has been the prime target.
In their assimilative efforts, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan have not allowed
Balochi to be the language of instructions in schools even at primary level.
Balochi publications and institutions for academic research are never
encouraged. The unique case in
educational history anywhere is that in the University of Balochistan in Quetta
Balochi language is taught in Masters Level but not in Primary schools or in basic educational institutions. Print
and electronic media in these countries have been manipulated by people from
dominant nationality and all state institutions run by non-Baloch are assigned the task for media management formulating policy approaches
aimed at so-called ‘assimilation and integration’. Pakistan and Iran have
acquired the services of quite a number pseudo- specialists and literary
figures, whose writings and discourses are aimed to target the Baloch heritage,
to shade it off, to put it in doubt, or just to ignore it to give a painted
picture of Baloch nationalism and its existence as a separate historical
entity. Suppression of Balochi language and manipulation of religion are main
endeavors for integration of Baloch nationality into broader majority
nationalities of Iran and Pakistan. Baloch never incorporated either
Zoroastrianism or Islam as such, in their social or political life. Instead
they had been guided by centuries old cultural and traditional values in their
national behavior. A liberal and tolerant mindset had been evolved among Baloch
masses over centuries that are unprecedented in this part of the world which is
known for its chauvinism and religious fundamentalism.
Yet
another area where the host states are activity working is to undermine Baloch
tribal solidarity and harmony. The Pakistani State has been instigating inter-tribal
rivalries and encouraging tribal enmity between various tribes. These efforts
inhibited growth of urban areas, retarded transformation of the society from
traditional to transitional and modern and have reinforced tribal ways of life.
A similar policy was adopted by the Iranians against the Baloch. Although these
manipulations checkered a unified struggle as a nation, the consequent damages
and suffering stimulated a deep political awareness among the masses.
While
the modes and scale of political-cultural oppression by ruling powers have
varied in time and by place, the conditions of Baloch in Pakistan, Iran and
Afghanistan share some important common features. First the Baloch areas
overlap multi-nation-state borders; they thus acquire significance for
"national security” of respective host states and are vulnerable for
interference and manipulation by regional and international powers. Second, the
Baloch regions of these countries are usually the poorest, least developed
areas, systematically marginalized by the centers of economic powers. Third,
the dynamics of assimilation, repression and the Baloch resistance in each
country have affected the direction and outcome of the Baloch struggle. Fourth
is the manipulation of religion as means for integration and assimilation of Baloch
into broader state nationalities of Iran and Pakistan.
Realities of Baloch National Question
Since
the time of Iranian monarch Anushervan,
Baloch sentiments of nationality and the love of independence have been
cemented, by an impressive series of national uprisings, as well as influenced by
the post-World War II wave of decolonization and the access to statehood of
peoples far less important and much less advanced than the Baloch. To
understand the dynamics of Baloch national question it is imperative to discuss
some of the basic realities of the problem.
The
basic truth of Baloch national question is the existence of a Baloch nation,
with one homeland, Balochistan. It is an old sociological reality historically
constituted, etched on the collective Baloch memory and engraved in the
geography of the area. The second is the political partition of Balochistan, in
the aftermath of the unjust decisions of the boundary commissions reached
between British Empire, Persia and Afghanistan. Third is the fraudulent
referendum in British Balochistan in June 1947 and forcible annexation of Kalat
state by Pakistan in 1948. The fourth is that in the three countries where
Baloch live, the states are formed on ethnic lines dominated by one majority
nationality. The fifth reality is the misrepresentation and manipulation of
historical events very systematically in the region by the states and their
institutions, to the detriment of Baloch society and its heritage. And lastly the Baloch demand for
self-rule constitutes a democratic pursuit that is incompatible with the
despotism and religious-based nationalism of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan.
These
basic realities have, on one hand, reinforced the Baloch general feeling of
frustration and on the other hand, it has led to different political and socio-economic
situations in other parts of divided Balochistan. The Baloch uprisings in Iran
and Pakistan had all the same background - the will of national liberation. The
Baloch people believe themselves to constitute but one nation, and Balochistan,
one homeland. Most of the Baloch nationalist political parties affirm the
existence of one, but divided Baloch nation. These parties operating within
legal limits and conscious of political impediments in their respective
countries generally seek autonomist or federalist solutions to the Baloch
question as a provisional political solution within the framework of the
existing states.
The Paradox of Pakistani Identity
The
national question in Pakistan can be interpreted by pointing to a distinction
between the thematic and problematic levels of nationalist thoughts. This is
especially important in the contradictory mission of Pakistani identity that
has opted for transforming national cultures of different nationalities to a
so-called Pakistani culture while at the same time struggling in maintaining a unique
religious identity, in the greater dimension of being part of illusionary
Muslim umma or solidarity. Conceived and created on the theory that religion
alone can be a binding force between diverse ethnic and national entities of
North West and Southeast of Indian subcontinent, Pakistan is facing the worse identity
crisis since its inception. The traumatic events leading to separation of East
Bengal in 1971 made religion amply redundant as a binding force for the country
and its diverse peoples. The recent dissolution of ideological states of Soviet
Union and Yugoslavia gave further impetus to the thinking of many saner
elements in the majority nationality of Pakistan, the Punjab, to search for a new sound and logical personality
of the state, which could provide a rationale for a viable Pakistan, and to
determine the parameters of relations between majority and minority
nationalities.
Pakistan
came as a unique phenomenon in modern history. Its top political leadership and
bureaucracy came from northern India, having no cultural and social roots in
the new-found country. It was also unique that the language of a few hundred
thousand emigrants was declared as the national and official language of a
sovereign state. It was not only the ruling elite but the very ‘ideology of
Pakistan’, that only the religion forming the basis of any nationality, which was
alien to the present nationalities comprising Pakistan. Proponent of “Pakistan
ideology”, the Muslim league, (formed in 1906) a political party that was
formed and groomed by British rulers, had no popular support within the present
geographical boundaries of the country, a fact fully reflected in the
pre-partition general elections.
The
state establishment in line with the illusionary religious personality of the state
has to justify dictates of so-called ideology in its internal and external
policy approaches for five decades with not so pleasant consequences. The
paradox of Pakistani Islamic nationalism resulted in hostility both towards
national aspirations of minority nationalities and propagation of a superfluous
non-existing Islamic umma. It is quite obvious that Pakistani nationalism did
not serve as a means of awakening of Pakistani masses to national
consciousness. It was rather a misconceived
mission undertaken by a particular class of intellectuals whose discourses were
laden with dilemma of having no cultural roots or social bona fide in the new
society which they were incidentally dominating. The state is facing the
identity crisis stemming from the aforementioned paradox.
Such
inconsistency in approaches and policies internal and external is evident in
all spheres of national life. Being one of the poorest countries of the world
it is maintaining a huge army equipped with nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
By the policies it has been pursuing it appears that the country has a hegemonistic eye on the entire region. It wanted to
rule and suppress the Bengalis. It sought to turn Afghanistan as a satellite
state of theirs after Soviet withdrawal through proxy, Taliban. Pakistan is
openly demanding the right of self-determination for an Indian constituent
nationality, Kashmiris, and fought the Indian thrice over the land. The country
supports the Palestinian right to self-rule as a matter of state policy. It also
backed the Chechens against the Russians. But Pakistan impudently denies the
same right to the peoples who have been waging political and in Baloch case
military struggles intermittently within Pakistan during the last many decades
for their right to self rule. Pakistan never
even accepts the existence of the ancient peoples like the Baloch, Pakhtoons or
the Sindhis having different cultural and historical identities, within its
borders. It is not willing to concede genuine democratic rights to them
regardless of the clear stand it is taking on the rights of peoples all over the
world to self-determination. Therefore, by all calculations Pakistan has been
pursuing a contradictory position on each and every principle of governance and
the rights of peoples to rule themselves as upheld by the United Nations
charter and covenants.
The National Question in Pakistan
There
are four distinct nations in Pakistan. These nations have their ancestral
home-land, common decent of several centuries, common culture expressed in
their basic values, beliefs and practices, and a collective feelings of
solidarity. In Pakistan, Punjabi is the
ruling nationality holding more than 80%
leadership positions in several areas of governance such as judiciary,
executive, legislature and public
administration. Therefore, the conflict between the ruling nationality and
others is growing incessantly. The elite section of the ruling nation is not
prepared to accept Pakistan as a multinational
state rather they have been endeavoring to impose the superfluous idea of a
single nation. In their misplaced enthusiasm
they are equating the Punjabi/immigrant values, beliefs and practices as the
naissance or foundation of a “Pakistani culture”. This ridiculous perception had
led to erroneous conclusions that the national question in Pakistan has already
been resolved. In reality, this kind of thinking reflects the Punjabi
chauvinistic mindset with consequential theoretical and ideological chaos
creating deep and irreparable schism in Pakistani society.
The
political dynamics of the post-September 2001 have certain characteristics that
are distressing Pakistani establishment and slightly influencing its polity of
religious extremism and militancy on the one hand and perpetuation of repressive
policies towards national minorities on the other. The military junta and state
elites in an apparent policy shift in order to affiliate the regime with the West
are offering new arguments with reference to the significance of a liberal and
secular identity of Pakistan. It appears that the establishment is heading
towards the abandonment of Islamic ideology as a political manifesto. Islam is apparently
being brought from the centre to the periphery. However, the national minorities
see the official shift in policy approaches from religious to liberal is a
temporary maneuver mostly prompted by
an urge to safe guard the interests of ruling elites rather than by a genuinely
legitimate and sustainable interest in Pakistani identity. This is quite clear
by the fact that in the recent rhetoric of tolerance and pluralism by Pakistani
rulers there is no lessening of tyrannical policies towards national minorities
or any mention of the fact that Pakistan is a multi-national state.
Since
its creation, Pakistan has been passing through a transitional period, where
normal constitutional life is far from being established and where the socio- political
crisis has not yet been settled. It is in connection with this situation that
the national question must be examined. When seeking a solution of the question
we must take into account not only the situation at home but also the situation
abroad. Pakistan is situated between central Asia, Middle East, and between
south Asia and China. In the given situation where ruling elite is oblivious of
the national question, it is quite possible, therefore, that a combination of
internal and external conditions may arise in which one or another nationality
in Pakistan may find it convenient to raise and settle the question of its
independence unilaterally and in a violent manner.
The
Pakistani state is compressed from the top by the drastic changes in
international polity and from the bottom by the internal conflicts among
various nationalities and is being increasingly and finely minced by the
concomitant action of these two powerful jaws. The way out consists, first of
all awareness of the new realities and of germinating and nourishing the new
seeds of potential empowerment for masses of minority nationalities. The new
reality exposes, in many subtle but unequivocal ways the unremitting decay and
obsolescence of the state ideology. A new pragmatism must be matched by the
emergence of a new paradigm that means a new, more appropriate way of seeing truth.
The new paradigm should advocate the basic principles of autonomy,
democracy and secularism.
Resolving Baloch Question
The
Baloch National question can be seen as an instance of a large but oppressed
people, stubbornly struggling for their natural and fundamental human rights to
sovereign status. The Baloch question has to be approached in the context of
short term and long term solutions. The short term solution can be reached in the Pakistani context while the long term
solution can be sought keeping in mind the broader question of Baloch sovereign
autonomy in neighboring countries.
The
kind of colonialism that the present Pakistani and Iranian state systems are
practicing in Balochistan is more degrading and more harmful than ever known in
this region. In the new millennium a new scenario of national governance should
prevail. The attributes of the new system of governance should be harmonious partnership
among nations in Pakistan and Iran. A federal structure and national autonomous
provincial governing mechanisms may appropriately address the problem and offer
prospects of a new pleasant partnership of trust and coexistence. The federal government
should take responsibility in areas of defense, foreign affairs, and on minimum
of fiscal discipline. All other state functions should be taken care of by the federating
units. Such a mechanism will generate
participation, share responsibilities, and offer opportunities to all nations.
Therefore, such an arrangement will provide the foundation for stronger,
civilized, prosperous and proud Pakistani peoples in a multinational state with
a new vision and a civilized image.
If
Pakistan wants a democratic solution to the Baloch question, she must imperatively
amend her fundamental perception and recognize, the existence of the Baloch
within her boundaries as a people distinct from other nationalities comprising
Pakistan, equal in collective rights and duties. For this a new constitution
has to be evolved with the consent of all nationalities. Without such a
constitution federal and democratic in character and essence it will be difficult
to reach a solution which could be in line with internationally recognized
principles of justice and equality of all peoples in a multi-national state. A
democratic Pakistan recognizing the rights of minority nations within its
confines will be in the best interest of the civilized world as well, which is
facing increasing threat emanating from conservative and fundamentalist
societies like Pakistan and Iran.
New World Polity and the Baloch Question
In
agonizing circumstances of socio-cultural and political repression and economic
depression throughout the Baloch land and increasing sense of national
solidarity amongst the Baloch masses, Balochistan has offered valuable
opportunities as a base for a national liberation struggle. That these
opportunities have not been seized demonstrates the weaknesses of Baloch leadership,
powerful international political and strategic interests in the region as well
as intricacies of Baloch nationalism within. In Iran Persian-speaking Iranians
are dominating while in Afghanistan Pakhthoons had an upper hand for many
decades where Baloch have never been associated with power even in the areas
where they form majority. Pakistan is an exceptional case. It ensured exclusion
of Baloch and their genuine representatives from government of their state or
province. Baloch are excluded in all state institutions and policy making
bodies. In State services: armed forces, judiciary, civil armed forces; they
can hardly find their way in. In the bi-cameral legislature, upper house, the
Senate, where Baloch are equally represented, has no authority to exercise powers
in budgetary, economic and other matters. In the powerful lower house Baloch
form nearly 4% of the total. The state and their functionaries do ensure that
even any symbolic representation in political or constitutional bodies should
be individuals who have least concern for the Baloch and their interests or who
can easily collude with the establishment dominated by majority nationality.
Provincial governments in Balochistan which were thought to represent minimum
Baloch sentiments were overthrown in 1973 and 1998 through state maneuvers.
During the last 55 years of its existence the total period where a government
with Baloch small representation was in power in the province of Balochistan was
for only 26 months in all. [9 months in 1973 when NAP was allowed to form a
government and then during 1997-8 when a Coalition Ministry of Balochistan
National Party managed the provincial affairs for 15 months] In
Iran, the situation is still worse. The Baloch are completely excluded from
power: political, social and economic in their own land.
In
its true perspective the Baloch question is that of a stateless nation. The
artificial political frontiers dividing Balochistan, which are in real sense
inter-Baloch frontiers, would loose their raison d’être in the years to come. The
issue has two dimensions: For a short term, a federalist solution could be
envisaged in all parts of Balochistan, within the boundaries of the existing
states. But more appropriate and lasting answer in line with internationally
recognized principles of right of self determination and sovereign equality of nations
will be that different parts of divided Balochistan should be equally federated
between themselves, as a national sovereign entity. By its central geographical
position, the Baloch is predestined to play the role of a democratic link
between the neighboring nations. It will be at the heart of a kind of union
between the nations of the southern tip of central Asia. Balochistan would then
become a land of peace and a highway for co-operation and development in
association with other liberal and democratic nations of the world.
However,
the most outstanding reality with regard to creation of national states can not
easily be over looked. That is the notion of conceding the right to national sovereignty
to oppressed nationalities and subjugated national entities on the basis of the
right of self determination will considerably change the entire political and
geographical landscape of the globe and may not be acceptable for many. But it
clearly involves unavoidable principles of sovereign equality of nations and of
democracy and humanitarianism.
It
is quite strange that the civilized worlds of Europe and America, instead of
putting meaningful pressure on Pakistan, to help its transformation into a
federal, secular and democratic state, are giving much encouragement and
political and military sustenance to ruling elite and the trembling state system
in Pakistan with all its radical dispensation and religious extremism. The West
is reluctant to come out openly in support of rights of nationalities. They are
unenthusiastic in supporting secular and enlightened ideals of justice and
equality to all. In a cold-war perspective the US and the West viewed the
Baloch aspiration for autonomy as an inappreciable extension of Soviet
influence, and supported the Persian and Pakistani military and political
campaigns against the Baloch. However, after September 2001, far-reaching
changes are being observed in international relations in general and central
and south Asia in particular. The dynamics of post September polity are bound
to effect the national questions of the subjugated nations in the region.
Balochistan is geographically and strategically important in respect of oil
game being played in central Asia. A liberal and secular Balochistan located at
the centre of three states of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan with their
fundamentalist religious ideologies and wide spread discontent among their
constituent nationalities, can play a positive and balancing role. The war on
fundamentalism and extremism by international community with rhetoric of human
rights, multi-ethnic, broad based regimes, and declaration of war on the axis
of evil by US has to a certain extent enhanced the hopes and probability for
the achievement of long cherished dreams of emancipation of Baloch masses.
Conclusions
The
national question is one of the major destabilizing political factors in third
world countries. The newly independent countries in Asia and Africa, with
artificial boundaries created by colonial powers are facing the daunting task
of accommodating the national aspirations of their various constituent
nationalities. The Baloch nation with its long standing claim of autonomy is
looking with new hopes of gaining its fundamental right of self-determination
in a new world polity in the post-Soviet era and in the aftermath of September 11
events. The biggest questions of all in the present day world after Soviet disintegration
precisely on cultural, linguistic, national and ethnic lines, is whether
multi-national countries should accommodate the aspirations of their
nationalities for sovereign status or the same borders of Afro-Asian and Latin
American countries mostly drawn by colonial powers regardless of national
sensitivities of many peoples should continue in the new millennium, is haunting
the political and philosophical mind of many people. Whether the world would rise
to the occasion and accepts the national demands of subjugated peoples to make
it a safe place to live, is yet to be seen – Jan Muhammad Dashti.