India’s recent Baloch obsession

A case of tit for tat

            “The people of Balochistan, Gilgit and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) have thanked me a lot in past few days, I am grateful to them!”

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s statement on his Independence Day speech, stating, “the people of Balochistan, Gilgit and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) have thanked me a lot in past few days, I am grateful to them” gave a new spark to the tensions between India and Pakistan – who are historic rivals. Only, the propaganda this time is on the long standing Balochistan issue. India smartly played the ‘Baloch card’ as a ‘tit for tat’ formula for Kashmir, which many, including Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, say is an attempt to divert international community’s attention from the Kashmir dispute. Just when Pakistan raises its voice against India for its violence in Kashmir, Modi in turn says that “Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the ‘atrocities’ committed by it against the people in Balochistan and PoK”.

The frequent statements regarding Balochistan from Indian side of the border clearly explains its obsession for this integral province of Pakistan and how it has boldly refused to hold talks with Pakistan and is imposing preconditions for a dialogue shows nothing but Indian obstinacy for improving bilateral relations.

Atrocities in Kashmir for atrocities in Balochistan – this seems to be the agenda of the highly democratic and sovereign Delhi, which has earned support from two of Pakistan’s regional neighbours, including Dhaka and Kabul as Bangladeshi Information Minister Hasanul Haque Inu, during a visit to India, said that Bangladesh supports Modi’s stand on Balochistan and would soon make a policy declaration on the issue while former Afghan president Hamid Karzai said that in Balochistan, there is extreme suffering at the hands of extremists promoted by state structures in Pakistan and Modi’s remarks should make the Pakistani government “see the gravity of the situation”.

The controversial statement by Modi is termed by Pakistani government as a proof of Indian involvement in Balochistan when Foreign Affairs Adviser Sartaj Aziz said that Indian Prime Minister Modi’s reference to Balochistan only proves Pakistan’s contention that India, through its main intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), has been fomenting terrorism in Balochistan. The arrest of Indian agent Kulbhushan Jadhav from the same province, who confessed that he had funded and trained less-privileged people and “turned them against Balochistan and Pakistan”, is an utter proof of Indian efforts for destabilising Pakistan.

The frequent statements regarding Balochistan from Indian side of the border clearly explains its obsession for this integral province of Pakistan and how it has boldly refused to hold talks with Pakistan and is imposing preconditions for a dialogue shows nothing but Indian obstinacy for improving bilateral relations. The stubbornness on the Indian part is also quite justified with the United States standing on its side. Although the US defied the idea of an independent Balochistan, it also said that it is ‘concerned’ about the human rights situation there. And now that the US and India are coming closer with John Kerry’s visit, Indian diplomacy and regional support has toppled Pakistan’s stance on the issue.

Indian stance on Balochistan is only to disturb Pakistan, they want to divert the world’s attention from Kashmir dispute, says Ayaz Amir

Analyst and senior politician Ayaz Amir while commenting on this Indian obsession said that India is not obsessed with Balochistan, it is worried about the situation in Kashmir which they are unable to handle. They only want to divert the world’s attention from Kashmir dispute; the main concern is Kashmir, not Balochistan.

India wants negotiations on its own terms, it wants a discussion on everything but Kashmir, Amir said while talking to DNA. However, he said, the nature of dialogue changes with time and so the terms of dialogue are different now. This time around, they are not even ready to have a composite dialogue as they want a talk excluding the Kashmir issue, said the analyst.

“The Indian stance on Balochistan is only to disturb Pakistan,” he said and added that the US is concerned about Afghanistan and so it asks us to ‘do more’.

When asked if a missing foreign minister is adding to the severity of the relations, the analyst said that a full-fledge policy needs to be made. “We need a forceful, powerful and capable person who can get himself heard at all fronts,” he said. Regarding the joint statement from India and US regarding cross-border terrorism, Amir said that instead of the military, the Foreign Office should have given a formal statement which shows a weakness in foreign policy.

Modi’s statement on Balochistan and Kashmir shows that they have accepted their involvement in the areas. The case of Indian spy Kubhushan Jadhav has become strong now. We don’t need to ask India to hold talks with us. We only need to tell the world that India is refusing to have a dialogue, says Qamar Cheema

Modi’s statement on Balochistan and Kashmir shows that they have accepted their involvement in the areas. The case of Indian spy Kubhushan Jadhav has become strong now, said scholar and researcher Qamar Cheema while talking to DNA.

It now depends on Pakistan at which level it goes and establishes the fact that there is an Indian link to the situation, he said. The Baloch are coming to the table and passing resolutions against India, there is an anti-India and pro-Pakistan sentiment among them, said Cheema, adding that Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif’s confrontation to Modi shows that Pakistan is strong and smart enough. We have a ‘proactive’ foreign policy now which had only been ‘reactive’ previously.

After Panama Papers, the prime minister wants to divert the attention of people to security and regional issues and so he is going to the United Nations and is reaching international community where he will give a clear stance on Balochistan and Kashmir, said Cheema.

The strategic dialogue with India was suspended after 2007 Mumbai attacks. We should cash this Indian sentiment that it does not believe in negotiation being the largest democracy in the world. This needs to be sold at international community and Pakistan should be marketed as a responsible state, he said.

Stressing the need to engage world community on the issue, he further said, “We don’t need to ask India to hold talks with us. We only need to tell the world that India is refusing to have a dialogue.” The era of strategic competition is over, now there is economic competition, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, security concerns and broader economic games; we should focus on these things, he said.

About the weak Foreign Ministry, like Ayaz Amir, Cheema also said that we do not specifically need a foreign minister, we only need an empowered person. People like Nawaz Sharif and Asif Zardari, he said, do not like to have such people around them. We can have an empowered person only when we strengthen our institutions which will take time as our ‘democracy’ is taking baby steps, he concluded.

The strategic importance of Balochistan cannot be denied as it is a major source of natural resources for the country, especially natural gas. The fact that it shares borders with Iran and war-torn Afghanistan, Balochistan has long been a target of ethnic, sectarian and cross-border terrorism. The rights of Baloch have repeatedly been oppressed making it the most neglected province of the country. In such a situation, it is no surprise that India can take advantage of this suppression and can promote the propaganda of a separate Balochistan.

Although Baloch took to streets against India and Chief Minister Sanaullah Zehri denounced Modi’s remarks, their grievances still need to be heard and that too, at the earliest. As exiled Baloch leader Brahamdagh Bugti claimed that the larger Pakistani society have alienated Baloch people by ignoring their plight, Pakistan needs to pay attention to this integral province whose importance is all the more increased with the development of Gwadar Port. Otherwise Pakistan will have to pay a heavy price by what Indian journalist-turned-politician MJ Akbar already equated for ‘simmering Balochistan’ and ‘1971 Bangladesh liberation’.