Daily Times editorial Nov 26, 2009

Reactions to Balochistan package

Some Baloch nationalists had delivered themselves of a rejectionist message even before the Balochistan package was presented in a joint session of parliament the other day. The rest have now joined the chorus. In case anyone is jumping to any conclusions, it needs to be stressed that negative or indifferent reactions to the package are not confined to those from the province. The main opposition party, the PML-N, sat stoically throughout the presentation, clarifying later that it considered the package only a set of proposals and would respond when debate gets under way at another joint session after Eid. Other parties too have reacted rather less than enthusiastically. The only positive sounds have come, unsurprisingly, from the government, from President Asif Ali Zardari downwards. But is this divide unexpected? If not, why not?
While there should be little quarrel with the government’s intent, the package either leaves out or misconstrues some vital issues that go to the heart of the conundrum in Balochistan. All the fine sentiments in the package of seeking reconciliation with our “Baloch brothers” and offering them at least some relief on many of their long-standing demands cannot hide one glaring fact. The government has behaved like in the parable about not seeing the elephant in the room. That ‘elephant’ is none other than the military and paramilitary operations being conducted in the province since at least 2002, which accelerated in quantity and intensity after 2006. Interior Minister Rehman Malik can go blue in the face denying that any military operation is in progress, but that does not change things a jot. If the military operation is a nationalist fiction, why has the package conceded the withdrawal of the army and a halt to cantonment construction? It is another matter that the idea of replacing the army with the FC is like jumping from the frying pan into the fire, such is the universal hatred for the FC in Balochistan. The bitter truth is that both the federal and the provincial government in Balochistan are helpless before the military’s view of the situation and what needs to be done. So far, the military has not given any indication that it agrees with the reconciliation thrust. The ‘elephant’ therefore, continues to rampage unchecked.
The package’s strange and unclear wording on who would benefit from the ‘amnesty’, i.e. all those who do not have terrorism or other serious charges against them, would be humorous if the situation were not so dire. This formulation effectively excludes just about anyone who matters in the estranged Baloch nationalist milieu, including not only moderate parties within the province, but most definitely those who have chosen exile to lead the armed struggle from abroad. The government has slipped up in not accepting the sane advice to take the “real leaders” of Balochistan into confidence before announcing the package. If the nationalists at home and abroad do, by some stretch of the imagination, decide to engage the government despite their reservations, they are likely to adopt a hard stance for two reasons. One, the Baloch nationalist sentiment is weary of broken promises stretching back more than sixty years. There is a perception amongst the most radical elements in their ranks (whose number is growing) that further ‘talk’ is useless. They are therefore holding out for the maximalist position of independence. Two, there is a bottomless pit called a credibility and trust deficit on implementation of high sounding proposals between the nationalists and the authorities. Precisely for that reason, without an intelligent engagement of the extreme sentiment as well as the more moderate nationalists, any hope of bringing our estranged “brothers” back into the mainstream is only so much pie in the sky.