AT PENPOINT
That the Jaffar Express outrage shook the nation is not surprising, but it failed to achieve the aims of the perpetrators, which was to cow down the country and gain independence for Balochistan. The attack was perpetrated by separatists, not those arguing for provincial rights
Even if upholders of provincial rights used such methods, it would be wrong, but one could talk about giving them their rights, and arguing them down from their terrorism. With separatists, one must first find out why they have abandoned the solution of their problems within the framework of the federation, and then proceed to a solution. Even people comfortable in their nationality must not forget that citizenship is a two-way street. Pakistan itself is the result of separatist movement, and the main reason for separating put of India was that the Muslim-majority areas felt they would not get a fire shake.
It is one of history’s weird coincidences that nothing shows the truth of this fear than the Jaffar Express outrage itself. India is not just persecuting its minorities, very much including Muslims, but is inimical to Pakistan. Having its East Wing secede in 1971 and becoming Bangladesh, it is now trying to undermine Balochistan.
However, while this is not to argue that the rest of the country is extremely well off, and Balochistan has been somehow ‘left behind’. That is merely an argument for money to be thrown at the problem. The problems afflicting Balochistan may be worse than in the other provinces, but they are the same problems, like out-of-school children or lack of female literacy.
In fact, the one problem unique to Balochistan is that of tribalism, and of the hold of the tribal Sardars over their tribesmen. This is not to say that other provinces do not face this problem, but it means that the government has a harder time establishing its writ.
The Jaffar Express outrage succeeded in the sense that it caught the national attention, much as the APS Peshawar massacre a decade ago. It cannot be said that if its recommendation had been followed, the Balochistan terror might have been avoided, but as they were not followed, so we will never know. It can safely be predicted that those recommendations will be dusted off, and presented again. It might be noted that the Baloch Liberation Army has introduced the element of terrorism in the separatist movement. Separatism started virtually when Balochistan decided to join Pakistan, and when Jalat state was brought into the new country. However, then it took the form of tribesmen taking to the hills, and taking potshots at passing convoys.
Even in the insurgency of the 1970s, after the dismissal of the Mengal ministry, there were no acts of terror.
Terrorism might be an idea borrowed from one of the BLA’s allies in the insurgency, the Tehrik Taliban Pakistan. The BLA also has help from India’s RAW, and is ideologically opposed to the TTP for two overarching reasons. First, separatists tend to have a leftist orientation. Then there is the Brahwi-Pashtun divide. The separatists are fierce about their Baloch identity, while the TTP re strongest among the Pashtuns.
One of the perennial issues facing Balochistan is that its people contain a large proportion of Pashtuns. The late Zafarullah Jamali said that instead of identifying as Baloch or Pushtuns, there was a common Balochistani identity needed. It should be acknowledged here that the Pushtuns of Balochistan are actually those provinces of southern Afghanistan broken off from the Durrani Empire after the First Afghan War of 1840. It should not be forgotten that Balochistan did not exist as a separate province until One-Unit was broken up for the 1970 elections, when a number of separate elements which had been absorbed into it in 1955, were carved out as a separate province. One of those elements had been the princely state of Kalat, which is a centre of separatist activity.
Separatism and religious militancy become two faces of the same coin, with both seeking answers to the questions arising out of a state which does not provide for its citizens what they want.
It has been observed often that the Baloch are subservient to their Sardars. It is also noticeable that the tribal Sardars are also separatist leaders. There may be two factors at work. First, the Sardars are not given the subsidies that the British used to give. Those subsidies are basically bribes, and leave it to the Sardars to distribute downwards, so that the roads are secured. The second factor is that there is a breakdown of the Sardari system, and as tribesmen get educated, leave their villages, get jobs, get justice from the state rather than the Sardar, they are less dependent on the Sardar, and thus owe him less obedience. One way of preserving this dominance would be to establish a separate state.
However, separatism is not the only issue. There is also religious extremism. This was on show in KP at the same time as the train hijack, when there were a slew of attacks on police stations, as well as assassinations of religious leaders. The last helps show that religious extremism consumes its own, as militants have the most rancour not against those who are clearly beyond the pale, but those who may differ from them by a hairsbreadth. There is another reason why these attacks are to take place until Eidul Fitr, because the reward for any righteous deed is supposed to be 70-fold during Ramazan. Because of this, there is a discernible relationship between Ramadan and jihad, whether it be the Battle of Badr, or the Fall of Constantinople. So-called ‘martyrdom operations’ therefore are more numerous during Ramazan.
It should be borne in mind that while nationalism may conceivably be a reason for dying (and there have been nationalist suicide bombers), it may be removed by funds, respect, development, or whatever is the reason for separatist alienation. Religious militancy can only be brought to an end by the state surrendering totally. Brutal suppression has the opposite result, and merely proliferates the number of people ready to resist the state. The missing persons of Balochistan showed that state authorities who had helped the USA in the rendition of religious militants had also learned that short-term fix for those deemed enemies of the state.
The PTI opposes an operation against the militants because they need to be brought into the national mainstream. It has not brought forward the real reason why an operation needs to be thought about carefully. Operations have been carried out before. The result has been that an operation has become necessary again.
There is a certain confluence between Baloch separatism and religious militancy. And that is that both have their roots in parties which, back in the day, opposed Pakistan. The only way of dispelling this is education. But that takes time to have an effect. Does the state have enough time to sit back and let it take effect? It might be said that the opportunity has been missed, more vigorous means have to be used, but the point is not to find explanations but solutions.
Education will only work if its message coincides with reality. If the state does not provide an individual with the space to carry out his pursuits without interruption, he will seek other means. He may spend a peaceable life, obedient to the state, but the state cannot control what goes on within his head.
Separatism and religious militancy become two faces of the same coin, with both seeking answers to the questions arising out of a state which does not provide for its citizens what they want.
Source link
