 |
| Pakhtuns in Balochistan are 90% of Its Population |
Ignoring Pakhtuns, the Balochistan issue is mainly presented through the prism of Baloch’s eroded autonomy and lack of control over their resources
Pakhtuns in the province of Balochistan are victims of linear injustice. The most painful and mind-boggling aspect is the blurred understanding of the Balochistan issue among the common Pakistanis as well as intelligentsia. The Balochistan issue is mainly presented through the prism of Baloch’s eroded autonomy and lack of control over their resources in post-independence era. Yet, unlike Pakhtuns, living in the Balochistan province they do not face loss of identity, autonomy and status as major stakeholders.
Perhaps, Pakhtun is the only ethnic group, particularly in Balochistan, whose sufferings began with the advent of the British in the subcontinent and continues hitherto. In the post-independence era, especially in the 1970s, another layer of injustice was added by depriving them of whatever was left by the colonial power.
Baluchistan a Wrong Name and Misnomer and Creation of British :
Before the British occupation, the name of Balochistan never existed in history to represent a geo-physical entity that was named by the British as British Balochistan and later by Pakistan as the province of Balochistan in the Constitution of 1973.
The Baloch and Brahvi were predominantly living in four princely states —
1. Kalat,
2. Kharan,
3. Lasbela
4.and Makran.
Lasbela was enjoying internal autonomy with a predominantly Baloch Tribal areas ( Still Under Article 247 as tribal Areas ) , Baluchis People of these tribal Areas although a Minority gave the name Baluchistan to this new British Created area .
1. Marri,
2. Bugti,
3. Chagai
4. and Sinjrani
Khan of Kalat as Head Baluchistan Under Pashtun Durrani Afghan Empire before 1841.
State of Kalat and its Khan of Kalat , was was Vasal of Afghanistan under ther Durrani Empire of Pashtuns, In the aftermath of the first Anglo-Afghan War, on October 6, 1841 the British handed over Quetta to Khan of Kalat on the occasion of his coronation.
Previously the State of Kalat under Khan of Kalat , remaining as a vassal of the Afghan kingdom of Pashtuns Durrani who,s rule also extended to Sind Karachi and over India till Delhi and Lahore .
State of Kalat carried immense strategic importance for the British expedition in Afghanistan.The British got Nasirabad and Nushki on lease from the Khan of Kalat. The strategic importance of Nushki was to extend railway line to the border of Iran.
The British also extracted the areas of Pishin, Sibi, Chaman, Shahrig, Shora Rud, comprising 95 percent Pakhtun population from Afghanistan that were called assigned districts under the infamous Gandamak Treaty signed on May 26, 1879 at Jalalabad Near Peshawar .
Pashtuns were now Named as British Balochistan a Missnomer although not still being considered a Province as Yet but area joined with NWFP / Pakhtunkhwa and being seperated from Durrand Line from Afghanistan to which it Previously Belonged .
Ultimately, on November 1, 1887, the areas with 90 per cent of Pakhtun population were declared as Chief Commissioner Province of British Balochistan.
The British officer and later colonial governor of the then North West Frontier Province (NWFP), Sir Olaf Caroe, admitted it was a misnomer given by the British. He suggested that it should be named British Afghanistan while Sir Herbert Aubrey Francis Metcalfe (agent to governor general for British Balochistan 1943) said that it should be named as British Pathanistan instead of British Balochistan.
In 1947, the members of the official jirga and Quetta municipality decided on behalf of the Chief Commissioner Province of the British Balochistan to join the state of Pakistan, whereas the lower and upper house of the Kalat State repudiated the accession of the Khan of Kalat in favour of Pakistan.
Until June 30, 1970, the Chief Commissioner Province of the British Balochistan and the Baloch areas, mostly comprising the princely states, never remained as one administrative unit in the history.
In 1952, the princely states of Kalat, Kharan, Makran and Lasbela were named as Balochistan States Union. In 1955, the Chief Commissioner Province of British Balochistan was named as Quetta Division and three states Kalat, Kharan and Makran of Balochistan States of Union along with Chagai, extracted from the Chief Commissioner Province, were declared as Kalat Division. Both the divisions had equal representation in the West Pakistan Provincial Assembly. The State of Lasbela was merged into the Karachi Division and Nasirabad was merged into Jacobabad Division that were later returned to Balochistan after the scrapping of one unit.
Further Implementing the British Polices by Punjabi Establishment
On July 1, 1970, the one unit scheme was abolished by Martial Law Administrator General Yahya Khan. Consequently, the predominantly Pakhtun populated Quetta Division of the former Chief Commission Province and Baloch majority Kalat Division, along with Lasbela and Nasirabad, were merged into the province of Balochistan.
On July 1, 1970, the one unit scheme was abolished by Martial Law Administrator General Yahya Khan. Consequently, the predominantly Pakhtun populated Quetta Division of the former Chief Commission Province and Baloch majority Kalat Division, along with Lasbela and Nasirabad, were merged into the province of Balochistan.
Pashtuns Lost their Identity and became Baluchistan Occupants now, but the final Blow came in Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto time when it was separated from NWFP/ Pakhtunkhwa and NAP/ ANP did not Protest.
Khan Abdul Samad Khan Achakzai quit the National Awami Party (NAP) in protest over accepting the merger of Pakhtun belt into the Baloch areas and naming them as the province of Balochistan. He formed the Pakhtunkhwa National Awami Party before his martyrdom on December 2, 1973. His son, Mahmood Khan Achakzai, is carrying forward his father’s legacy of democratic struggle.
Political Compromise under a Barrel of a Gun
Ironically, instead of correcting the injustice committed by the colonial power and the subsequent undemocratic forces, the Constitution of 1973 also endorsed the anomaly adding another ethnic and political fault line to the polarised society of Pakistan.
The leadership of the then NAP, particularly its Pakhtun leaders, either committed a political mistake or made a political compromise by agreeing to the scheme.
The Pakhtun in Balochistan perhaps also seem to be the victim of constituency politics as Pakhtun nationalist leaders from the north were more concerned about the identity and autonomy of the then NWFP and mostly gave a cold shoulder to the identity and autonomy of the southern Pakhtun in Balochistan.
The mainstream media and intelligentsia also ignored this important aspect that added another layer to the problem. Such a blurred understanding would render any solution to the current conflict a superficial one. A lack of attention and preference might be due to a political and democratic struggle adopted by the Pakhtun for attaining their identity and autonomy that seldom attained attention in Pakistan.
It is a rare political issue which is not contested by the Baloch and Pakhtun as the former also recognise the Pakhtun’s rights to identity and autonomy. For instance, Dr Wahid Baloch writes in his essay, “The Solution of Balochistan Problem”, published in The Pakistan Christian Post, “Balochistan’s boundaries need to be redrawn based on historical, ethnic and linguistic line and all Pashtun areas of Balochistan should be joined with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.”
However, making a choice should be the intrinsic democratic right of Pakhtuns whether they opt for a separate unit referred to as “Southern Pakhtunkhwa” by them or prefer to merge with other Pakhtun areas as a unit representing their historical ethnic identity on this side of the Durand Line.
Instead of redressing the colonial era injustices after independence, our security paranoid establishment further confounded the fault lines. Pakistan needs to bridge every fault line rather than take on only terrorism to bring peace and political stability. Needless to say that terrorism is just one manifestation of the flawed security paradigm.
source: http://tns.thenews.com.pk/pakhtuns-in-balochistan/#.VPIvR_mUega
Ironically, instead of correcting the injustice committed by the colonial power and the subsequent undemocratic forces, the Constitution of 1973 also endorsed the anomaly adding another ethnic and political fault line to the polarised society of Pakistan.
The leadership of the then NAP, particularly its Pakhtun leaders, either committed a political mistake or made a political compromise by agreeing to the scheme.
The Pakhtun in Balochistan perhaps also seem to be the victim of constituency politics as Pakhtun nationalist leaders from the north were more concerned about the identity and autonomy of the then NWFP and mostly gave a cold shoulder to the identity and autonomy of the southern Pakhtun in Balochistan.
The mainstream media and intelligentsia also ignored this important aspect that added another layer to the problem. Such a blurred understanding would render any solution to the current conflict a superficial one. A lack of attention and preference might be due to a political and democratic struggle adopted by the Pakhtun for attaining their identity and autonomy that seldom attained attention in Pakistan.
It is a rare political issue which is not contested by the Baloch and Pakhtun as the former also recognise the Pakhtun’s rights to identity and autonomy. For instance, Dr Wahid Baloch writes in his essay, “The Solution of Balochistan Problem”, published in The Pakistan Christian Post, “Balochistan’s boundaries need to be redrawn based on historical, ethnic and linguistic line and all Pashtun areas of Balochistan should be joined with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.”
However, making a choice should be the intrinsic democratic right of Pakhtuns whether they opt for a separate unit referred to as “Southern Pakhtunkhwa” by them or prefer to merge with other Pakhtun areas as a unit representing their historical ethnic identity on this side of the Durand Line.
Instead of redressing the colonial era injustices after independence, our security paranoid establishment further confounded the fault lines. Pakistan needs to bridge every fault line rather than take on only terrorism to bring peace and political stability. Needless to say that terrorism is just one manifestation of the flawed security paradigm.
source: http://tns.thenews.com.pk/pakhtuns-in-balochistan/#.VPIvR_mUega
