jump to navigation

ICG Report: Countering Militancy in FATA October 27, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
add a comment

ICG

According to the International Crisis Group, “The military operation in South Waziristan is unlikely to succeed in curbing the spread of religious militancy in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), unless the Pakistan government implements political reforms in that part of the country. Pakistani Taliban groups have gained significant power in the tribal agencies, seven administrative districts bordering on Afghanistan.

“While state institutions in FATA are increasingly dysfunctional, the militants have dismantled or assumed control of an already fragile tribal structure. This encroaching Talibanisation is not the product of tribal traditions or resistance. It is the result of short-sighted military policies and a colonial-era body of law that isolates the region from the rest of the country, giving it an ambiguous constitutional status and denying political freedoms and economic opportunity to the population.

“While the militants’ hold over FATA can be broken, the longer the state delays implementing political, administrative, judicial and economic reforms, the more difficult it will be to stabilise the region.” Read the full Report

PRESS REVIEW: Killing of Balochistan’s Education Minister October 27, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
3 comments

DAILY TIMES EDITORIAL: State of affairs in Balochistan

The Baloch Liberation United Front (BLUF) has killed the Balochistan Education Minister Shafiq Ahmed Khan outside his residence in Quetta. The slain minister was a member of the ruling PPP but was Punjabi by extraction. He is the second Balochistan minister to be killed in the last two months. The terrorist “liberators” of the province have killed scores of Punjabis mostly engaged in the education sector as “foreign” settlers to highlight their separatist ideology.

Promptly, someone has put the blame on India. Talking to Daily Times, Quetta’s Commerce College Principal Mirza Amanat Ali Baig said, “Since India has increased the number of consulates in Afghanistan, troubles have enormously increased for us, as terrorists are coming from Afghanistan and getting full support from there”. This may be a good way of explaining the activity of the Baloch insurgents based in Balochistan, but it hardly helps in analysing what is happening in Balochistan or saving Mr Baig from being killed.

A fringe Baloch nationalism has always wanted Balochistan to separate from Pakistan. The genuine grievance of Balochistan against the treatment it has received from the federation has never stopped lending strength to this fringe. But its dominance comes, not from its numbers, but from its ability to practise violence and intimidate. In this its power is no different from the terror practised by the Taliban in Swat. The outreach of BLUF and other extreme nationalists into the lives of the citizens is scary indeed.

It is a pity that at the very moment when violence has increased in Balochistan, the rest of Pakistan is completely in favour of meeting its demands and giving it a better economic deal. Gallup polls and opinion surveys show that the people of Pakistan side with the Baloch cause and wish to punish those who have used violence against the people of Balochistan. At the level of the political parties too there is a consensus over yielding to the demands of Balochistan. The current discussion in the National Finance Commission (NFC) has clearly signalled an unprecedented economic package to Balochistan.

But Balochistan is no longer under any cohesive administrative control to take advantage of the good times that are in store for it. No one otherwise convinced of the new popular attitude towards Balochistan is willing to stand up in Quetta and speak optimistically. Those who kill ensure that no one adopts a positive attitude towards the changing mood in the federation. Elected politicians complain of lax security but collectively demand a shrinking of the role of the police in the province.

The province is unique in having big tribal leaders among the Baloch who are enlightened and influential. Just three or four will swing the opinion of the province this way or that. Since the tragic death of Nawab Akbar Bugti, however, their attitude has stiffened and their demands may have gone beyond the demand for a fair economic deal including possession of the natural resources of the province. The moderate person in Balochistan who prefers the middle course is a very scared and muffled man.

One way Islamabad avoids handling the problem is to emphasise the “conspiracy” theory about Balochistan. It says Balochistan is fine but India is causing all the terrorism happening there. There is no dearth of the “conspiracy theory” among the Baloch too but they see their land being assailed by competing superpowers like America and China, and lesser regional powers like India, Iran and Russia. Islamabad says it has all the proof of India fishing in the troubled waters of Balochistan but will not show it “till it is appropriate to do so”. It keeps on claiming that Balochistan is clean of the Taliban but no one in Quetta believes it.

All kinds of terrorists have assembled in Balochistan partly because of the “strategic depth” policies of the past. There are Afghan refugee camps in the province serving as breeding grounds for jihad against whomever they see as their enemies, including the Shia Hazaras of Quetta. The Iranian Baloch too take shelter in the province and strike across the Iranian border; and there is Lashkar-e-Jhangvi from Punjab which is enslaved to Al Qaeda and its plans in Balochistan. Tragically, those who support separation have no idea of the kind of ethnic-linguistic inferno they are inviting on to themselves.

Tuesday, 27 Oct, 2009 DAWN EDITORIAL: Balochistan ignored

LOSING faith in a government is one thing. In working democracies this lack of trust is expressed through the ballot box and change can be sought through peaceful means. In short, there is nothing inherently alarming about a change in government. But losing trust in the state is a different matter altogether. Votes don’t enter the equation and protests against real or perceived crimes by the centre stay peaceful only up to a point. At some stage the country’s territorial boundaries come to be questioned. For many in Balochistan this threshold was crossed decades ago — shortly after the country’s creation, in fact, and years before East Pakistanis began pressing for a separate homeland. It seems that those who call the shots in this country have learnt few lessons from the 1971 debacle. Today there is a feeling in Balochistan that the province is part of the federation on paper alone, at the mercy of a state that continues to exploit its natural wealth and quell any sign of dissent with disproportionate force. Promises by the centre mean little, for the simple reason that they have rarely been honoured.

Sunday’s assassination of Balochistan’s education minister is a tragic reminder of the simmering tensions in the province. The full-blown insurgency witnessed in the Musharraf era may be a thing of the past but Balochistan is anything but stable. And matters could get worse if the centre persists with back-pedalling on its commitments. It was pledged early last year that the provinces would be allowed greater control over their own resources. It was said in March 2008 that abolishing the concurrent list — within a year — would ensure a level of provincial autonomy that would benefit the state as a whole. At the same time, Balochistan was promised massive uplift packages that would help the socio-economic development of the country’s most resource-rich yet least privileged province. Those who ‘disappeared’ in Balochistan during Gen Musharraf’s reign of terror would get their day in court. But little or nothing has been delivered on the ground. For the disillusioned, the government has done exactly what they expected: nothing.

True, the state has much on its plate right now. Tackling Taliban militancy and terrorism is a full-time job but that does not mean Balochistan can be ignored. It is widely believed that the separatist movement in the province — at least in its current incarnation — is aided and abetted by external actors. By failing to address the genuine grievances of the Baloch people, the government and state may inadvertently be following a plot line scripted by those who desire chaos in Pakistan.

Tuesday, 27 Oct, 2009 THE NEWS EDITORIAL: Shooting in Quetta
The shooting of the Balochistan education minister is the latest episode in the violence that continues mercilessly in the country. A Baloch nationalist organization has claimed responsibility for the action. The city of Quetta, where the minister was shot down outside his house, is now rocked by tensions between opposing groups as the provincial government announced a three-day period of mourning. The fact is that we have too many strains running through our society. The discontent in Balochistan has been left unaddressed for far too long. Over 18 months after the PPP government took charge in Islamabad, little has been done to tackle the issues of the province. The result has been an upsurge in incidents of violence such as the one that took the life of a man who enjoyed considerable popularity as a politician. His status as a PPP leader may have been one factor why he was targeted. Mr Shafiq Ahmed Khan becomes the second provincial minister to be assassinated within two months. Others too are in danger of attack. In the current volatile situation we face, this will only add to the instability and unrest encountered everywhere.

It is possible that as we descend into further violence, the Baloch nationalists are taking their cue from the Taliban and using similar tactics to make their own voice heard. The targeted killings in Quetta have expanded over the past few years. So too have incidents of kidnapping. The lack of law and order makes us feel as if we were living in a jungle with the state unable to perform its most fundamental duty of protecting life and ensuring safety. The question many of us ask is if there is a way out of this mess. The government’s priority must be to map out such a route. Otherwise it will face only greater and greater disquiet. As one part of a wider action aimed at eliminating militancy, the problems of Balochistan need to be squarely faced. Potentially, there is still space for dialogue between various political forces. But as the divide we see now grows, there is a possibility that this space will narrow, making it more and more difficult to persuade groups to sit together. This would be a recipe for further violence and chaos claiming new lives.

THE NATION EDITORIAL Tuesday, 27 Oct, 2009: Balochistan SOS

THE targeted killing of Balochistan’s Minister for Education was a deadly reminder of the ongoing terrorism in that province. It is unfortunate that the federal government, apart from declaratory platitudes expressing support and good intent, has failed to move substantively to resolve the problems in that deprived part of Pakistan. The irony is that on Balochistan everyone knows what should be done – that is political and economic solutions to resolve the feeling of discrimination and neglect that are harboured there. With each passing day, the hatred and suspicions mount on all sides and increasing polarisation is becoming ever more evident. After all, the targeted Minister, Shafiq Ahmed Khan, was a strong opponent of the use of military force in the province and a strong proponent apparently of Baloch rights. Yet, because he was in the provincial government, he became a target for the terrorists.
Worse still, our enemies outside are feeding this terrorism in Balochistan and exploiting the people’s resentment towards the state. Kabul continues to house the militant leadership. A critical question our leaders should pose to the US is why it, as the major occupation force in Afghanistan, is unable or unwilling to prevent the militants from using Afghanistan for launching of operations against Pakistan? Or is it a deliberate policy of the US to keep Balochistan destabilised, so as to hinder cooperative ventures like the Iran-Pakistan pipeline to be operationalised; and also to allow themselves space for launching terrorism through Jundullah into Iran’s Sistan province?
The fact of the matter is that Balochistan presents a far graver problem than FATA in terms of Pakistan’s future security and integrity. Because the terrorism and militancy in Balochistan is more targeted, and focused on security personnel, strategic plants and those seen as government collaborators, national focus remains diverted to the more sensational nondiscriminatory and more lethal killings through suicide bombings and bomb blasts that are thought to emanate from the Taliban militants of FATA. But the fast-paced alienation of the Baloch from the state of Pakistan requires a rapid politico-economic response from the state. By allowing ourselves to be diverted to FATA under the usual pressure from the US, we are tending to ignore the Balochistan problem even as external forces are busy exploiting this situation and giving ample succour to the militants who they hope will ignite the fissiparous tendencies within the province. It is time the state offered to welcome back the Prodigal Balochs who are prepared to accept the state and negotiate with it. It is time the green and white crescent and star flew all over Pakistani Balochistan again and was raised across the province by the people of the land itself.

BUSINESS RECORDER EDITORIAL: Murder in Quetta

It was clearly a target-killing. Shafiq Ahmed Khan, the Balochistan education minister and a PPP representative in the Raisani provincial cabinet, was in the sight of elements that are systematically playing havoc with ethnic harmony in the province, particularly since his loud protestations over the killing of Quetta’s Commerce College Principal Mirza Amanat Ali Baig.

A number of teachers have been murdered in Balochistan over the last some months and he was very upset over these wanton killings. He would not hesitate in accusing “Indians and elements hiding in Afghanistan” for such killings, insisting that “since India increased the number of consulates in Afghanistan, troubles have enormously increased for us”.

No wonder, within a few hours of the minister’s assassination the Balochistan Liberation United Front (BLUF), an underground outfit that demands independence for Balochistan, claimed responsibility for the killing. The said organisation had broken into the newspaper headlines early this year when it kidnapped UNHCR’s local representative, American national John Soleki, but set him free two months later for his ‘ill-health’ – raising suspicions about the BLUF’s real credentials.

What a tragedy; only last week the Balochistan Assembly adopted a resolution asking the Federal government to allow duty-free, bullet-proof cars for ministers. But the foregoing is only a part of the Baloch saga, replete with treachery and betrayal. Obviously, given more than half a century of broken pledges, the Balochs’ faith in commitments and promises made by the Centre – in hindsight those appear to be more of fire-fighting than honest words – has worn dangerously thin.

The same trust-deficit tends to obtain even when after the present government in Islamabad has completed 18 months. One may ask what happened to Prime Minister Gilani’s promise to abolish the Concurrent Legislative List? And how long have we travelled beyond what now appears to be the Senator Raza Rabbani-headed parliamentary committee’s report on Balochistan? Of course, there is some forward movement on human rights situation in Balochistan, since the demise of General Musharraf’s oppressive era.

But the wounds the dictatorial regime inflicted on the people of Balochistan are too deep to heal soon. That those raw wounds have the readily available potential to provide hostile forces the staple to fire up anti-Pakistan insurgency in Balochistan, there is no doubt about that. Of course since Prime Minister Gilani’s meeting with his Indian counterpart at Sharm el-Sheikh in June, much more evidence of Indian interference has come to light.

But whether someone else too is fishing in these troubled waters we would not know, until the mystery of Jundullah is resolved. The ultimate solution to the ongoing Balochistan imbroglio lies within our own national borders. It is essentially a national issue that unfortunately has been allowed to fester for too long-long enough to encourage our adversaries to feast on.

Hope had stirred that with the advent of democratic era, things would change for the better for the people of Balochistan. But that did not happen, mainly because the focus shifted onto the war on terror and, consequently, the peace and tranquillity required to rebuild the badly fractured Baloch society was hijacked by anti-state elements. The elements’ most potent weapon is an ethnic discord in Balochistan and they are using it extensively.

But surely the ferocity of their subversive activity notwithstanding, their chances of ultimate victory in their blood sport of target-killing is absolutely nil. The people of Pakistan can fight these elements with bare hands; by standing up to them, by displaying ethnic unity and social and sectarian harmony.

In the meanwhile, it is important that the concerned officials in Islamabad and Quetta move beyond the oft-reiterated intents and purposes outlined by various committees and commissions over all these years, and come up with tangible results. Something on the ground makes better image than the hot air of rosy promises.

PAKISTAN OBSERVER EDITORIAL: Gunning down of a Minister

BALOCHISTAN has been witnessing shocking incidents at regular intervals including killing of high profile figures and acts of sabotage creating a sense of insecurity among the law-abiding citizens. The assassination of Provincial Education Minister Shafiq Ahmad Khan in Quetta on Sunday once again draws the attention of the authorities that there was urgent need for taking major policy decisions to bring the situation back to normalcy.

Shafiq Ahmad Khan was a die-hard PPP leader, had no personal enmity and refused to get security guards. The gory incident shook not only Quetta and other parts of Balochistan but the entire country and a protect rally was also taken out in the Provincial Capital against his killing at the hands of misguided elements of Balochistan Liberation United Front. Its spokesman while claiming the responsibility for the murder said it was revenge to the murder of three Baloch leaders. Earlier a Balochistan Provincial Minister was killed in Karachi while firing incident took place at the residence of another in Quetta. These happenings leave no doubt that the three Baloch leaders were assassinated under a deep-rooted conspiracy to stir violence in order to keep the Province in turmoil. In the meantime, it is of utmost importance that political leadership of the Province, including the elected representatives must play their role to guide the masses, particularly the youths not to become tools in the hands of enemies of the country as they are not friends of Baloch people but exploiting them for the attainment of their nefarious designs. There is no doubt that international powers, including our neighbour are directly and indirectly behind the instability in Balochistan and the need is to persuade the major political players in the Province to realize the gravity of the situation, forget injustices done to them in the past and contribute in restoring some sort of stability. At the same time we would impress upon the Prime Minister to take the initiative, meet prominent Baloch leaders and announce the Balochistan package without any loss of time to remove sense of deprivation among the people there.

Balochistan minister shot dead in Quetta October 26, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

11111
By Malik Siraj Akbar

QUETTA: Unidentified gunmen killed Balochistan Education Minister Shafiq Ahmed Khan (55), a member of the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), outside his residence in the provincial capital on Sunday – a day before the provincial government’s announcement to reopen all educational institutions in the province.

The Baloch Liberation United Front (BLUF) – an underground organisation that demands independence for Balochistan – claimed responsibility for the high-profile killing.

Police in Quetta said unidentified motorcyclists gunned down the provincial minister outside his residence on Thogai Road, while his brother’s father-in-law, Hydayat Jaffar, was injured in the same attack. The minister was shot in the head and torso, and died while being taken to hospital.

The ruling PPP has announced three days of mourning, and strongly condemned the killing. The minister’s assassination came two days after the Balochistan Assembly passed a resolution asking the centre to allow the duty-free import of bulletproof vehicles for ministers.

Born to Punjabi settlers, the slain minister vocally opposed target killings of teachers in Balochistan. According to him, “Indians and elements hiding in Afghanistan” are responsible for such killings.

In an interview with Daily Times on June 23 – commenting on the killing of Quetta’s Commerce College Principal Mirza Amant Ali Baig – the minister said, “Since India has increased the number of consulates in Afghanistan, troubles have enormously increased for us, as terrorists are coming from Afghanistan and getting full support from there.”

Born in Quetta, Shahfiq obtained a law degree from the provincial capital’s Law College, and practiced as a lawyer. He remained the finance chairman of the Quetta Municipal Committee for four years, in addition to serving as an elected councillor of Quetta’s Ward No 6 for 12 years. He also worked as the Chairman of Quetta Zakat Committee for three years, and acted as the president of the PPP’s Quetta wing.

Shafiq is the second minister from Balochistan to have been killed over the last two months.

Shafiq’s killing has been condemned by people from all walks of life – including President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, Balochistan Governor Nawab Zulfiqar Ali Magsi and Chief Minister Nawab Muhammad Aslam Raisani. Businessmen and lawyers in Quetta have announced a complete shutter-down strike across Balochistan to condemn the killing, and lawyers said they would not attend proceedings of any court to mark a black day.

The slain minister would be laid to rest today (Monday) in Quetta. The Balochistan government has announced the closure of all educational institutions across the province to mourn the death of the minister.

Read the story on Daily Times website:

My interview on Deutsche Welle about Jundullah cheif October 21, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
add a comment

DW

Tension has erupted between the usually friendly neighbours Pakistan and Iran since a suicide bombing last weekend killed dozens of people in Iranian Balochistan, close to the Pakistani border. Several high-ranking officers of the Revolutionary Guards died in the worst terrorist attack Iran had seen in years. Tehran says the attackers came from Pakistan. Iran has called on Islamabad to arrest the leaders of Jundullah, the rebel group which claimed responsibility for the attack.

Thomas Bärthlein finds out from Malik Siraj Akbar, the bureau chief of Pakistan’s “Daily Times” newspaper in Quetta, how much is known about Jundullah head Abdolmalek Rigi Listen:

Revisiting the Che Guevara-like days of Baloch resistance movement with Asad Rehman October 19, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
28 comments

DSC00742

By Malik Siraj Akbar

Guerilla movements in Balochistan have always been romanticized by young men who aspire to overthrow the domineering elite and bring revolutions. Taking to the hills for the rights of the Baloch fatherland is what has placed many statesmen, kings, governors and princes from Balochistan at irremovable positions in the annals of the Baloch history.

A similar exceptionally striking chapter of the Baloch movement was written in the early 1970s when a group of five scions of Pakistani non-Baloch elite joined Balochistan’s guerilla war against the Pakistan army’s occupation of the Baloch land. Popularly known as the London Group, the members of this study circle left the comforts of wealthy life, education in London and joined the Balochs in their battle against the Pakistan army in the Marri hills. In their early twenties, these comrades adopted Balochi names, learned the language, explored the terrain, faced hunger and fought on the frontline in their commitment for the Balochs.

A spirited Asad Rehman, the youngest but the fittest in the popular London Group, remembers how he, at the age of 21, used to ambush the Pakistani military convoys and take away ammunition from them to sustain the movement. An eyewitness to what he bills as the ‘genocide” of the Balochs in the 70s, Rehman alias Chakar Khan, still an ardent supporter of an independent Balochistan, reveals how Baloch women were used as ‘comfort women’ in the military custody and male fighters were captured and thrown from the helicopters.

In an exclusive but a candid and revealing interview with this writer, Rheman recalls his Che Guevara -like days of Baloch resistance movement of 1970s and compares it with today’s Baloch movement. Excerpts:

MALIK SIRAJ AKBAR: Tell us something about your family background.

ASAD RAHMAN: I am the son of late Justice S.A. Rahman, who retired as Chief Justice of Pakistan’s Supreme Court in 1968. We were three brothers and one sister. My eldest brother, Shahid Rahman, a Supreme Court lawyer, has passed away. My sister is the Dean of Liberal Arts at Beacon House National University, Lahore. My middle brother, Rashid Rahman, is a well-known journalist and political analyst.

I owe my sense of justice and serving poor humanity to my parents because they helped all sorts of people. Until my mother died in 2002, she was running a Convalescent Home with (late) Begum Justice Shahabuddin where they treat women and children free of cost and this was established in 1948.

My father was also the member of the Boundary Commission and, therefore, worked very closely with Quaid-e-Azam and Lord Radcliff. He was in the East Pakistan Boundary Commission. He served as a High Court judge in 1947, became the Chief Justice of the High Court in 1955 and was elevated to the Supreme Court of Pakistan in 1960. We did not know how he help poor people until his death in 1979 when lots of people came from his hometown of Wazirabad and told us that he had actually educated hundreds of boys and girls of the area. Even my mother did not know about this aspect of his humility and humanity. He was a totally self made man.

I was born in Murree, district of Rawalpindi on 11 August 1950. We lived all our lives in Lahore and I was educated in Lahore. In 1969, after completing my intermediate, I left for London to study architecture. In 68-69 when the anti-Ayub movement was going on, I was very much a part of it as a student-agitator of Government College Lahore.

I did not finish my studies in London because in 1971, I came back to Pakistan (straight to Balochistan). Why I came to Balochistan is a very interesting story. My father was also the chairman of the tribunal which was trying Sheik Mujeeb-ur-Rehman in 1968-69 in Agartala Conspiracy Case and the Chief Election Commissioner in the 1970 elections, reputed to be the fairest and cleanest elections in Pakistan’s history. There were two Bengali judges and my father was the chairman of the tribunal. When Sheik Mujeeb was finally released by Bhutto, the first person he visited was my father. He said he had come to thank him because, according to Mujeeb, “if you had not been the chairman, they would have hung us.”

When I went to London, there were around 25 Pakistani, boys and girls, from different cities who had formed a study group. There were some Indian students as well in the study group. We used to study all kinds of literature, Marxist, Maoist, Leninist, Stalin etc. In Pakistan in those days, we could not get this kind of literature. In London, we got the opportunity to read Marxist literature. I do not call myself a Communist, Marxist or Socialist simply because I do not think we are true Marxists. When you have an ideology and you do not practice it or are unable to practice it, it does not give you a reason to claim to be a Marxist.

The study of these literatures gave us an understanding of humanity, human rights and understanding of exploitation by the ruling elite of the poor. That is what drove me to Balochistan.

MSA: Who were the prominent members of the London Group?

AR: There was Najam Sethi, Ahmed Rashid, my brother, Rashid Rehman, Dilip Dass. These are the people who originally came to support the Balochistan movement. These are the names I am willing to disclose because they are well-known as having played a part in the Balochistan movement. I would not be discussing the names of the other members of the London Group for two reasons: One, they did not participate in Balochistan movement. Two, I will be compromising on their security if I disclose their names.

In 1970, when the East Pakistan civil war started, we felt that whatever was happening in East Pakistan was wrong. We decided to bring out a monthly magazine, called Pakistan Zindabad (Long Live Pakistan). In that magazine, we used to write about nationality rights, minority rights, fundamental human rights, articles on how the army had taken on Pakistan’s polity, how it was dictating to civil government that was in place. We started to write about the East Pakistan issues and the economic exploitation. We used to distribute that magazine in London, Manchester and Birmingham.

I suppose some friends felt they needed to bring this magazine to Pakistan. They smuggled some copies of it to Pakistan. Some Leftist groups here reproduced the magazine and distributed it among the local Left circles. I can take the name of Ali Baksh Talpur, who has now passed away, who was the one to bring this magazine to the attention of Sher Mohammad Marri (whom we called as “Babu” while the others remember him as General Sheroff) and Nawab Khair Baksh Marri.

MSA: So was it the first time you got in touch with the Baloch leaders or had you already met some Baloch leaders or students back in London who informed you about the situation in Balochistan.

AR: No. we were never in touch with the Baloch at all. In fact, we had very little knowledge about what was going on in Balochistan. We did not know about the military operations of 1948, 1958 and the ones in 1962 to 1968. Like any other Pakistani outside Balochistan, we had no knowledge of these things. Information in those days was completely suppressed. I mean just look at whatever happened in East Pakistan, for instance, when West Pakistanis were absolutely blank. They knew nothing about East Pakistan.

Similarly, about Balochistan, I can tell you that we did not know what the issue of Balochistan was. We did not know about the forceful annexation or the military operations.

Hence, when Sher Mohammad Marri and Nawab Khair Baksh Marri read our magazine (Pakistan Zindabad), they felt we were talking about identical issues which they were also trying to address at the time such as nationality rights, ethnic rights. So they sent Mohammad Bhaba to London to contact us. Mohammad Bhaba was the son of Hameed Bhaba. His was a family that was settled in South Africa and connected with the African National Congress (ANC). They had come back to Karachi and resettled there. Hameed Bhaba was a very good friend of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. They had socialist ideas and they got in touch with Khair Baksh Marri through Ali Baksh Talpur. Bhaba approached us through a mutual friend. We had lengthy discussions with him. He then gave us the offer from Khair Baksh Marri that if we really wanted to do some revolutionary work and implement the kind of ideas that we had then he could provide us an area conducive for such work (in Balochistan). At that time, it was not decided in which part of Balochistan or Sindh we were going to work.

The London Group sat and finally decided that we could support the Balochistan Movement. Most of the people decided not to join the movement, except for seven of us. Two of them eventually backed out days before we were preparing to come to Balochistan. In March 1971, I was the first and the youngest from the group to come to Karachi. A member of the Marri tribe, who could speak Urdu, was sent to Karachi to receive me. I traveled with him up to Lehri and from there I met up with Mir Hazar Khan Bijrani, who took me to the Marri tribal area. We established our first camp in Bhamboor in a mountain called Miandadtot. It was just a normal camp not a training camp or study circle. There was no one I could do study with. I could not speak the local language and the Marrris, except for a few, did not speak Urdu. We remained there for two months until we shifted to Tadri.

MSA: What did it feel like for someone like you who had come from an elite background, proper education, cosmopolitan upbringing to live with the rustic tribesmen in Balochistan.

AR: I would not describe myself as someone from the elite. In the first place, you have to understand when I went to Balochistan; it was my commitment to work with the poorest, marginalized and disfranchised population of Pakistan wherever it was in Balochistan, Sindh, North West Frontier Province, Punjab or Northern areas. Since we were given an opportunity to work in Balochistan, the five of us who had the commitment came to Balochistan. Najam and Rashid were based in Karachi as our liaison which was responsible for collecting funds, ensuring medical treatment and public awareness.

Ahmed Rashid and Dilip Dass came to join us in the mountains and worked with me. About a year later, Mohammad Ali Talpur joined us as a paramedic. He was a contact of Mohammad Bhaba, not a member of the original London Group. We started to learn the language, customs and traditions of the Marris.

MSA: How comfortable were the Marris in accommodating you people in their ranks?

AR: In the first place, many of the Marris were not told that we were non-Balochs. They were told that we were Balochs who had lived all their lives in Sindh and Karachi. They did not know that we were Punjabis until 1978. The government came to know about our identity in 1974.

I was hosted by Mir Hazar Khan Bijrani. I owe a great debt to Mir Hazar’s father, Gula Khan, who died in 1975 at the age of 105. He used to sit with me and tell me about Baloch history, folklore, customs, traditions, the dos and don’ts of the tribal society, the administration of tribal society, the role of the Sardar, mukhadams, waderas.

Everything that I know about the Baloch tribal society, from a social point of view, is because of Mir Hazar’s father, who had fought at a young age against the British when they invaded the Marri area. He was also the richest man in terms of livestock and crops in the Marri area. He financed the whole war for four years.

MSA: How old were you when you came to Balochistan and how easy was it to adjust with the tribal atmosphere?

AR: I celebrated my 21st birthday in the Marri tribal area. I do not know about the others but it was a little easier for me to adjust with the new surroundings. It took me four months to learn Balochi language which I fluently speak till today. Because of Persian poetry taught in our schools of those days (Iqbal) and Balochi being a sister language of Persian, it was easier for me to pick up the language faster.

I was the youngest and the fittest in the group. Ahmed Rashid is flatfooted. So it made moving in the mountains difficult for him. His eyesight was bad. He used to wear spectacles, so did Dilip Dass and Mohammad Ali.

Since I picked up the language quickly, Mohammad Ali trained me in the medical aspect. We started a foot-doctor scheme where, for example, if a woman was ill and could not come to our camp for treatment then, I used to go there and provide them medicines. This helped me to travel around and get to know more Marris. Eventually, when the NAP (National Awami Party) government was dismissed in 1973, by that time we had totally integrated ourselves into the Marri tribe and learnt their language and customs.

MSA: How did your parents react to your decision to join the Balochistan movement?

AR: My parents did not know about my joining of the Balochistan movement until 1974. They thought that I was still in London studying architecture. We did not tell them due to security issues. It came to their knowledge only after the arrest of some members of the London Group from Karachi who also disclosed the names of other comrades.

In 1973, with the dismissal of the NAP government by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, we naturally prepared ourselves for a struggle. We knew that an onslaught was coming. We had very little time to prepare. I bought a Dara-made 303 rifle for Rs. 300. That was the only weapon I had. In the meanwhile, I recall, Balochistan was undergoing a drastic drought in 1971-73. In the wake of the drought, a lot of Marris moved to Sindh for grazing land and water. Hindu and Marri shopkeepers used to go to Sibi and bring ration into the Marri area.

After the NAP government dismissal, we found that the paramilitary forces were surrounding the Marri and Bugti areas as well as the Mengal and Bizenjo areas. When that happened, we started to prepare. The objective of this siege was to stop our food supplies that reached us with the help of the Marri traders. The forces intercepted the camel caravans, capture them, rip open the sacks so that the food would fall in the sand and become unusable for anybody to eat. Things like Gur, atta, sugar were deliberately mixed with the sand. Even the ghee tins were punctured.

In May 1973, another Baloch caravan was coming and the forces killed two men from the caravan. We could see that the paramilitary forces had adopted a specific strategy and were trying to starve the Marri tribesmen out; secondly, there were so many women, children and elderly citizens who were more vulnerable. We had to break the siege somehow. We decided to retaliate and on 17th May, 1973, I led a group of twenty Marri tribesmen and we attacked the same team of the security forces near the Tandori Railway station which had previously attacked and killed two members of the Baloch caravan. In the attack, we killed seven personnel of the Dir Scouts, captured their weapons and went back in the Marri area.

Four days later, Mawand and Kohlu were invaded by the Pakistani army on helicopters provided by the Shah of Iran because at that time Pakistan army did not have helicopters, especially the Chinook which the Iranians possessed. They also gave gunship helicopters to Pakistan and financed the whole war because the Shah of Iran feared that if the NAP government in Balochistan got established and strong then it would support the Iranian Balochistan movement. The Shah wanted the NAP government to be immediately dismissed. Bhutto looked at his personal interests based on relationship with the Shah of Iran rather than considering the national interest of Pakistan. The Bhutto-Reza Shah alliance actually started the whole war. It was the bloodiest war Balochistan has ever seen. Even today, that kind of fighting is not taking place. Nearly 5000 causalities were suffered by the army, out of which 1500 were killed and 3500 injured. On the Baloch guerrilla side, we only lost about 70 guerillas but 15000 Baloch old men, women and children were killed or wounded.

MSA: Was it only the Marris who fought and suffered causalities?

AR: No. Meharullah Khan Mengal, a brother of Sardar Attaullah Mengal, had a group in Mengal area. Aslam Gichki led a group in Lasbela and Mir Safar Khan Zarakzai was operating in Sarawan while we operated in Marri and Bugti areas. I commanded the area right from Pir Samalan down to Marri tribal areas and Dera Gazi Khan. The political command was with Mir Hazar Khan Bijrani. Sher Mohammad Marri had been arrested in January 1973. Even before the dismissal of the NAP government, I had a lot of interactions with “Babu” (Sher Mohamamd Marri). He used to come to Tadri. We also met Khair Baksh Marri four to five times in those two years. We used to discuss issues and strategies for development. Khair Baksh and Attaullah Mengal and all other NAP leaders were arrested in August 1973.

MSA: Was Nawab Khair Baksh Marri ever on the forefront of the armed movement?

AR: No.

MSA: What was his role?

AR: His was a political leader’s role.

MSA: What about General Sheroff?

AR: Sheroff, as I said, was the leader of the 1962 to 1968 movement for the break up of the One Unit regime and led the guerrilla forces in those days. He had been arrested even before the dismissal of the NAP government. So, he could not participate in the resistance movement. It was Mir Hazar who was playing the political as well as the military role. He deputed me as a commander of the Marri tribal units. We had about 1500 guerillas. At no time did I have more than 200 guerilla fighters because we used to rotate them.

MSA: Where did you get your weapons from?

AR: I told you I had purchased a Dara-made 303 rifle in 1972. We had no extraordinary weapons with us when we started the resistance. After our assaults on the Pakistan army, we captured weapons from the army. I have used the M1 Garrant semi-automatic rifle, an LMG, Seminnof, which is a Chinese weapon, G-3, MG3P machine gun and the Kalashnikov AK 47. We captured all these weapons from the Army and Special Services Group, the commando unit of the Pakistan army. We did face a shortage of weapons and ammunition all the time. We continued to replenish our ammunition from the Pashtun traders who used to bring ammunition and sell them to us. In those days, I remember a round of 303 or that of a Kalashnikov cost us one rupee. We also bought some Kalashnikovs from the Pashtoons. We did not know where the Phastuns brought those weapons from. We did not have any support from Afghanistan, India, or Soviet Union. It was a totally indigenously financed war. It was mostly financed by Mir Hazar.

Meherullah and Aslam Gichki’s groups finally gave in one year’s time. They disbanded their groups and went to Afghanistan.

MSA: Why did they give up?

AR: I think due to insufficient commitment. You have several instances in the Baloch movement when the members of the elite gave up the comforts of life and led the Baloch resistance movement. For example, Nawab Nauroz Khan and Prince Abdul Karim Khan belonged to the elite families but still went to the mountains. No doubt, Aslam Gichki and Meherullah were Balochs and I have nothing against them but I think they were not able to adjust with this kind of atmosphere. So, they disbanded and went to Afghanistan in 1974. From May 1973 to 1974, the fighting had intensified. Safar Khan on his side was involved in a number of clashes.

MSA: Was it a full-fledged war or a guerilla war?

AR: It was all guerilla war. What we, the members of the London Group, brought to the Balochistan movement was modern thinking and technique on guerilla war. We had read a lot of books on Che Guevara, General Vo Nguyen Giap, even non-communist generals of Cyprus. We had an idea of guerilla war and conventional wars. We could not fight the Pakistan army in a conventional manner simply because we did not have the weapons, the financial resources and the manpower. It was basically a guerilla war. Some people say it was an insurgency. It was not. It was a resistance movement. I have always called all our Baloch fighters as resistance fighters and not as insurgents.

MSA: Could you further differentiate between “insurgency” and “resistance movement”.

AR: An insurgency is something planned and initiated with a clear objective. Resistance is opposition against the armed force who impose armed conflict. So, there is this crucial difference between the two.

MSA: For how long did the war last?

AR: It lasted till July 1977. In fact, Zia-ul-Haq had not declared a ceasefire at that time. Just after the elections, we ambushed another convoy near Barkhan in Khethran area. That was our last combat against the Pakistan army.

MSA: What was the means of transportation? Did you use camels, horses or vehicles?

AR: We did not use any transportation whatsoever, except our own feet. We used to move mostly at night. We had the advantage of knowing the terrain; knowing where the water was; where we could hide; where we could ambush; where we could cause maximum damage to the army. At that time, let me tell you, there was no unit as the FC (Frontier Corps). There were paramilitary forces such as the Dir Scouts or Swat Scouts. It was the army that was directly fighting us. After Safar Khan’s killing in 1975, the army deployed four divisions against the Marris. Each division comprised of 20,000 personnel. That said, a total number of 80,000 army-men were deployed against us. Even if you consider that 5000 of them were logistical troops, that means 15000 fighting troops were actually fighting against us per division. We continued to resist until Zia-ul-Haq declared a ceasefire in 1977. Zia instructed his army commanders in Balochistan to stay inside their camps and cantonments. Patrolling of the areas by the army was stopped.

By that that time, of course we were also exhausted. We were running short of ammunition, human resources. We had shifted a lot of our fighters’ families to Afghanistan as refugees. The fighters needed to get back home because those fighters who had their families in Sindh or in Balochistan could easily go for a short holiday to meet their families. But for those whose families had gone to Afghanistan, it was very difficult to go and meet the family members.

MSA: What about yourself? Did you ever go to Lahore to meet your family as you had come to Balochistan as early as March 1971?

AR: No. This is my regret that when my father passed away in February 1979, I was not able to bury him with my own hands. I was in Afghanistan. In December 1978, Zia disbanded the Hyderabad Tribunal case and released all the Baloch leaders. Najam Sethi had been arrested in 1976. He was also in the jail and released with the Baloch and Pashtun leaders.

MSA: How was Najam Sethi captured?

AR: He made a “very stupid” move –I call it a “stupid move”. As the cover we had in Karachi, Rashid was running an automobile workshop while Najam was with some architects and development consultants. Najam persuaded them to bid for some development projects in Marri area under Bhutto’s government. In the meanwhile, some people from the original London Group had been arrested from Karachi. They disclosed the names of all of us. He had at that time gone to Quetta and was flying in a military helicopter to go and see the site of a project that they wanted to build.

MSA: How did he get into a “military helicopter” as you people were already fighting against the military?

AR: Now that is the whole question. We don’t know. Maybe the government gave them the consultancy and asked the army to take him there. I don’t know. The benefit of doubt has to be given over there. In any case, the message was sent to the pilot of the helicopter that Najam was flying in. Hence, the pilot turned back to Quetta where they arrested Najam and took him to the Hyderabad jail. After that, he had no role whatsoever in the Balochistan movement of the 1970s.

MSA: What happened to Dilip Dass, another comrade of yours from the London Group?

AR: Dilip Dass was arrested near Baelpat when he was going to Sindh to see some comrades. After that we never heard from him. He was traveling with a Marri called Sher Ali who was also arrested. We suspect somebody in Quetta actually gave away the information because he was transporting them to Sindh and then he got them arrested in Baelpat. Dilip was held in Mach and in Quilli Camp (in Quetta) for quite some time. We believe he died under torture. It is interesting that when Nawab Akbar Bugti was the chief minister in 1990, I came with a delegation of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) – that was the first time I was meeting Nawab Bugti. I spoke to him in Balochi and asked him for an investigation about Dilip. He got angry and said, “Your friends don’t understand Balochi. Who are you?” When I told him who I was, he actually got up from his seat and hugged me.

MSA: So he did not recognize you as Asad Rehman?

AR: No, because we had never met before. He had heard my name and knew what I was doing but we had never met. He did not know what I looked like physically. He hugged me and asked what I wanted from him.

I requested him that in Balochi traditions even if you kill your worst enemy, you handover the dead body to their family members. Therefore, I requested, Dilip’s dead body be handed over to his family. He said he would try to find out. Nawab Bugti called up his personal secretary and instructed him to contact the corps commander, the ISI [Inter-services intelligence] and whosoever and report back to him where Dilip had been buried. The military never gave that information to Nawab Bugti. Therefore, we were never able to take his body home.

MSA: I am touched by Bugti’s move –standing from his seat and hugging you.

AR: Yes, I am trying to tell you that this is the kind of respect we as outsiders – I won’t say just Punjabis because Dilip was not a Punjabi but a Karachi-based converted Hindu – got from the people of Balochistan. Every single Baloch Nawab or Sardar I have met, they have given me the same respect whether they were in favor of NAP or against it.

MSA: We hear that when you joined the Balochistan movement. You also adopted the Balochi alias name of Chakar Khan. How did this happen?

AR: Well they could not call me Asad Rehman. We were incognito in Balochistan. It was Mir Hazar who gave me this name. Since we were in Lehri and Chakar Khan Domki was the Sardar there, Mir Hazar asked in a light mood, “so what do we name him?” While Mohammad Bhaba was known as Murad Khan, Mir Hazar said, “Okay, why don’t we name him as Chakar Khan?”[Chakar Khan was a great Baloch statesman who lived in 1468-1565]. This is how I got my name. Subsequently, I realized how heavy it was as far as Baloch history was concerned. I was a little scared whether I would live up to that great name – in terms of Chakar Khan’s bravery and wisdom. I don’t know if I have accomplished it or not or whether I have held that name at the same level of respect. This was one of my fears that I would let that great name down, leave alone anything else.

MAS: When General Zia disbanded the Hyderabad Conspiracy case and announced general amnesty for the Baloch leaders, was this amnesty also for the London Group? Did you also benefit from this official decree?

AR: While the general amnesty was given to all, five of us (I, Rashid Rehman, Ahmed Rashid and Mohammad Ali Talpur) and Ajmal Khattak, who was in Afghanistan then, were denied amnesty. In January 1979, I went to Afghanistan after Mir Hazar Khan called me there so that I could help in organizing the refugee camps.

MSA: What was the number of the people who migrated to Afghanistan? Were they all from the Marri tribe?

AR: In total, there were 10,000 families. They were not just Marris. They were from Sarawan, Badani and Jamaldini areas as well.

MSA: Tell us something about the state of the media and the level of public awareness in those days. While the Pakistan army launched a major military operation in Balochistan, did rest of the country actually know what was happening in Balochistan?

AR: Just like the period of the East Pakistan debacle, no news used to go outside from Balochistan. We had no access to the media. We were not able to give our point of view. There were some Baloch leaders, like Sherbaz Mazari, who used to visit Balochistan and then go back to Punjab or Karachi and talk to the national media about the situation in Balochistan. Yet, he did not have the real information on the ground. It was in fact a very negative media for the Balochs. The government was very good at its own propaganda and disinformation which it used to spread through the media to mislead the civil society and the public opinion. For instance, when I went back to Lahore, the so-called leftist friends of ours came and met me. They asked why I was fighting a “sardars’ war”. That was the concept given to the people of Pakistan due to official disinformation. It was only those people who knew us and our ideology that understood what we were trying to do.

MSA: Your description of Dilip Dass’s disappearance and subsequent murder takes us back to the future. Even today, a lot of Baloch activists are believed to be held inside the torture cells maintained by the state-controlled intelligence agencies. What was the level of enforced disappearances in those days? Sherbaz Mazari has also disclosed in his autobiography A journey to Disillusionment that Baloch women were also picked by the army and used as sex-slaves. This coincides with the recent uproar in Balochistan about Zarina Marri case as well.

AR: As far as the issue of missing persons is concerned, it was as much in those days. Anybody who was arrested actually “disappeared”. According to our estimates, over 2000 people went missing in a period of four years. Even the fighters who were captured, they were never brought to the court.

Brigadier T (ariq) M (ahmmod) Shah was the commander of the Special Services Group. He allegedly used to throw Marris out of helicopters at great heights. As fate would have it, he himself died in the same way. He was doing para-jumping from a helicopter for August 14 celebrations. He jumped and his parachute did not open and he was killed. Some very influential people told us that throwing the Marris out of helicopter did happen. I cannot tell you the exact number of people who were subjected to such brutal treatment. In Mach Jail and Quili Camp, very, very atrocious and torturous treatment was given to the Marris.

MSA: Does it mean that there were no pressure groups or human rights organizations that could take notice of the human rights’ violation in Balochistan.

AR: No, nothing of that sort (ever existed) at all. In fact the international media did not know the whole thing till 1975 when I met Lawrence Lifchultz in Karachi. He is the one who broke the story of Balochistan story in Far East Economic Review in September 1975. After that Time magazine also picked it up. But they picked it up from an anti-communist point of view.

There was no media that was giving our point of view. There were no reports of the atrocities that were taking place in Balochistan. Women did disappear and were used as “comfort women” in the military camps as is being done at present. The involvement of women as victims is such a sordid story that the Balochs as well as we feel that even recalling those things is actually an attack on the dignity of the Baloch people. We normally do not talk about these things. We, however, remember the level of human rights violation of the level of picking up the women, rape, extrajudicial killings. The issue of women is a very, very emotional thing that one does not want talk about. It is very disturbing to talk about it, let alone the families and the individuals who went through it.

MSA: Tell us about the circumstances that led to your departure to Afghanistan.

AR: In the winter of 1974, Baloch tribes started to go to Afghanistan and take refuge there when the army started huge operations in Marri areas. When we realized that the kind of operation they were doing included arresting and killing non-combatant women, children and decimating livestock (the economic mainstay of the people), we decided to shift the families to Afghanistan. I would literally term it as a “genocide” that was taking place in Balochistan at that time. Today, Balochistan is encountering genocide once again.
Hence, we as a policy decided to shift our noncombatants –women, children and older citizens – to Sindh.

Some of our leaders who were outside the jail, they negotiated with the Afghan government of Dawood Khan to allow some of our families to go to Afghanistan. Ajmal Khattak, who was already in Afghanistan, is the one through whom we approached the Afghan government. Dawood Khan responded positively and allowed our families to go there. It was not an influx of refugees for just one year or a few months. It was a continued process. Wherever operations were taking place, we were pulling our people from there.

Eventually, there were about ten thousand families in Afghanistan. An equal number had migrated to Sindh, settled in Tandoadam, Nawabshah, Dadu, Hyderabad, Larkana and even some of them went to Karachi. If you count each family with six to seven members, the total number of refugees would become something like 120,000 people.

MSA: Did you use Afghanistan as a base for political activities or to launch offensive against the army deployed inside Balochistan?

AR: As far as fighting is concerned, it was only being waged by the people inside Balochistan. From Afghanistan, we tired to involve the international media about what was happening in Balochistan. From Sindh, we also tried to approach the national media but they had strict instructions of censorship. There was no report about us in the national media.

As I mentioned earlier, when Lawrence Lifchultz broke the story internationally, that was when the international media started to take a little bit of interest in what was going on in Balochistan. Again, papers like the Guardian and some Asian newspapers also took up the story. I think there was a lot of coverage in the Soviet Union and the Middle East.

MSA: How big was the support given by the Afghan government to the Balochs?

AR: The Afghan government only gave our people refuge. There was no military or financial support. The only financial support was just what is often offered to the refugees, such as food, medicine and some educational facility. We were not allowed to do any kind of business or trade in Afghanistan. We had limited movement. When I went in 1978, the schools in Khandahar and Zabul had already been established. We did not live in the cities but inside refugee camps very far away from the major Afghan cities.

Zabul was not a developed place while its capital Kalat was just like a village in Pakistan. It had a small hospital but we even did not live in the proper town of Kalat. Our main camp was based 20 kilometers away from Kalat in the mountains. The other camp, called the Khandhar Camp, was close to Khandhar city. But it was also located about six to seven kilometers away from the city center. We were not allowed to do any kind of trade.

MSA: How did the Afghan people receive the Baloch refugees? Were they forthcoming or hostile towards you?

AR: There was no discrimination from the Afghan people. They helped us many times. They accepted us as brothers confronted with a hard situation. They supported us, so did the Afghan government of the day. The animosity started much later. We did not support either the Khalq, Percham, the Soviets or Dawood for that matter. When the Mujahideen started fighting in Afghanistan, we were attacked by them in 1981-82. There were quite serious attacks but fortunately we were all from Balochistan and had weapons to defend ourselves. In 1981-82, the Mujahideen groups were not as powerful as they grew later on. They also attacked us in 1990 and 1991. In 1992, when the Balochs were coming to Balochistan, the families were ambushed by the Mujahideen which killed a lot of Balochs, including some women. They even threatened to kill Nawab Khair Baksh Marri. Now who was telling them do all this? Obviously, the government of Pakistan and the military were egging the Mujahideen to target the Balochs.

MSA: In the first place you said that General Zia-ul-Haq granted amnesty to the Baloch leaders soon after coming into power. Now, you are telling us that he was prompting the Mujahideen to attack the Balochs. Does it not contradict what you said previously? Why would General Zia do that?

AR: You see General Zia did not give amnesty. Initially, Zia’s reaction to the Baloch resistance was that it was a war initiated by Bhutto. There is this saying that your enemy is my enemy. He needed the support in Pakistan for the actions that he was going to take against Mr. Bhutto. The Mujahideen suspected that we were there maybe to support the Soviets. So they carried a number of small attacks on the Balochs. We lost one or two people only in all those attacks. In 1992, Taj Mohammad Jamali’s government came into power in Balochistan. It put a lot of pressure on the federal government that the Balochs should be brought back. Taj Jamali felt that Nawab Khair Baksh was a very respected leader of Balochistan. They did not want to leave him and his tribesmen in lurch. Therefore, they brought all of them back.

Taj Jamali even pressed Nawaz Sharif, the prime minister of Pakistan, to give two C-130s to bring back the families of Nawab Marri and some other leaders.

MSA: Some see Nawab Marri’s willingness to sit in a military C-130 and come back to Balochistan as a “political compromise”.

AR: I don’t think it was a compromise on the part of Khair Baksh Marri. I think it was a compromise as far as the province and its people were concerned. You see if you set such a precedence of attacking or killing a refugee leader then it has a lot of international repercussions. Meanwhile, Nawaz Sharif had no quarrel with Khair Baksh Marri. Even Akbar Khan Bugti went to Nawaz Sharif and told him to bring Khair Baksh back and also invite Sardar Attaullah Mengal from London to come back. If you remember, Nawaz Sharif invited them to Islamabad and they –Nawab Khair Baksh Marri, Sardar Attaullah Mengal and Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti – held a press conference together.

You have to look at the political situation of the day when these things happened. Balochistan’s population is very small and if this population that had migrated to Afghanistan was also left over there, the Balochs would lose that population. Therefore, Taj Jamali wanted to bring Nawab Marri and that population back to Balochistan. I know this that initially in 1990 Nawab Marri was approached and asked to return but he refused. It took the Baloch leadership a lot of efforts to go there and convince him to come again to Balochistan.

In 1992, the situation for the Baloch refugees in Afghanistan had become so grave that there was a threat to Nawab Marri’s and his family’s life and to all Balochs who were there as refugees. That was the reason they were brought back. It was not because of any political compromise or anything like that. It was just that Nawaz Sharif felt that Balochistan had been done badly with and they needed to repair whatever could be repaired. I mean it was political diplomacy basically that led to Khair Baksh’s return to Balochistan.

MSA: What about you? For how long did you stay in Afghanistan?

AR: I went to Afghanistan in January 1979 and flew from Kabul to London in May 1980. I came back to Pakistan in June of 1980. I was in Afghanistan for a year and half but it was a very turbulent period in Afghanistan. First, Dawood was overthrown by Khalq Party. Within Khalq Party, there was a coup. Tarakai was killed. Hafizullah Amin (1929-1979) came into power. Later on, the Parcham Party came into power with Babrak Karmal (1929-1996), who was later on replaced by Najeebullah (1947-1996). In this period, after the killing of Hafizullah Amin, the Soviet forces came inside Afghanistan. I was a witness of all that eventful epoch of the Afghan history.

At the same time, what I would like to say is there are many issues that need to be addressed. There has not been any research or analysis done of that period. Therefore, the political history of that period is very vague and I would request my friends, especially the Baloch friends, who can write, research and analyze as to what actually happened at that time.

MSA: What caused the current deadly differences between Nawab Khair Baksh Marri and Mir Hazar Khan?

AR: In answer to your question I do not have all the details as I had already left Afghanistan but what I have heard is that Mir Hazar asked for a political and operational analysis of the war period. He also asked for declaration of how much was contributed by Khair Baksh in the war financially as it was being alleged that NAP had received some funds. At the same time Khair Baksh was asked to clarify his position on his ideology and practice.

Apparently the issue of financing the war effort was what they fell out on. In the beginning Babu tried to mediate between the two but when KB brought in the issue of Bijarani versus Gazaini (KB belongs to Gazaini section) then Babu also sided with Mir Hazar (both Bijaranis).

I believe there is some truth in all the issues raised. Khair Baksh ordered Mir Hazar’s weapons taken away when they were returning to Balochistan and it is also alleged that he had Mir Hazar’s women searched. This is of course is against all Baloch customs and honor.

MSA: Let’s get back to the London Group? What happened to the individual players of the Group who came to Balochistan?

AR: It was only end of 1974 that the government came to know who was involved in the Balochistan movement. My brother Rashid Rehman, went underground when Najam Sethi was arrested. Rashid had already married when he joined the Balochistan movement. His eldest son was only about four months old. He sent his wife back to my father’s house in Lahore. Throughout that period until 1978 he was underground in Karachi. He established the liaison cell along with some friends.

They used to take out a magazine called Jabal (Mountain) and we used to feed them information from the mountains. Jabal was a very informative monthly magazine published and widely circulated in Balochistan and the leftist circles of Karachi, Lahore and other places. If you get hold of some old copies of Jabal, you must read it. I am sure you will find it very informative. In 1978, when amnesty was granted to the Baloch leaders, I asked Rashid to come to Afghanistan from where I would send him to London for a family reunion.

MSA: What about Ahmed Rashid?

AR: Ahmed Rashid is maybe a good intellectual but physically he was not suited for guerrilla activity or living in mountains. He was never able to pick up the language very well and he stood out that he was not a Baloch. He was very fair; a scanty beard although he was much older than me. He was not able to keep up with our Marri comrades when we were moving in camps. He wore spectacles at that time which transformed into a disadvantage for him. Plus, he was flatfooted. He was falling all over especially at nights when we were moving around. He never developed good friendships the way I was able to do. Maybe I had learned the language, the traditions and customs much better than anyone.

At the same time, because I was involved in fighting, when your life depends on somebody else’s actions then there develops an affiliation of comradeship which is much deeper than anything else.

Unfortunately, Ahmed was not a good rifleman. He could not shoot very well. In the Baloch culture, they expect you to do all these things but when you are unable then you stand out as somebody who is alien to the culture and life style.

There was a similar case as far as Dilip Dass was concerned. I must say something here which I have never revealed before. Since you are doing a very candid interview, I must mention it here that Dilip resented my position as the commander. They also resented my relationship with Mir Hazar with whom I was, and still am, very close.
As I mentioned before that I was taught a great deal of things from Mir Hazar’s father, Gulla Khan, I remember he was a very simple man. He liked me so much that he offered one of his daughters in marriage to me. Subsequently, I had to explain to Mir Hazar why I could not accept the offer.

MSA: Why could you not accept the offer? Were you already engaged or married?

AR: No. I was not married. I was only 20 years old when I came to Balochistan. Firstly, we were not-Baloch –But that would not be a big thing. The real reason for my refusal to the offer was that we had gone to Balochistan for a purpose and I did not want to get bogged down. If I had married and settled down in the Marri area, that would have defeated the whole purpose that I had come for. I discussed this with Mir Hazar Khan and told him why I could not accept the offer. Then, he explained it to his father that I was in the movement and did not want to get bogged down with the family issues. That could become my weakness.

MSA: How was Dilip Dass captured?

AR: Dilip was also unable to pick up the language too well. He wore spectacles. He was slightly a misfit for guerilla war. It was his resentment to my position that eventually threw him into the position he went into when he was captured and killed. Let me tell you what actually happened.

When we established our first camp in Khandhar, some issues popped up between our camp and the Khandhar government. I was asked by late Abdul Wahid Kurd to go to Afghanistan and settle that issue. When I came back to our camp, Dilip was there and asked why I had been nominated to go to Afghanistan to settle the issue and why not he (Dilip) to go for negotiations. I told him that I had no objections if he wanted to go. I wondered if he could handle the situation.

I told him there were some Marris who were also Bijranis and in fact from Mir Hazar’s section, like Yaqoob Ramkani, Dil Shahd and some others who were a little difficult to handle. I also reminded him that he should realize that he would be talking to the Afghan government. In order to do that, one needed to have a mandate. I mean Abdul Wahid Kurd had already sent my name to the Afghan authorities for negotiations. Dilip did not like that too much. As I told you, I was the youngest in the group. All of these people had been in the London study group much longer than me. They knew Marxism better than me. Possibly, they were much more exposed and conversant with the ideology. I don’t deny that.

That resentment against me grew out of ego and anger. So, Dilip left the camp with a Marri and contacted somebody, who was probably a Kurd, whom we suspect of being an infiltrator in the Baloch movement. He is the same man whom we suspect in Asadullah Mengal and Ahmed Shah Kurd’s murders.

MSA: Who was that Kurd?

AR: I don’t want to disclose his name. In this kind of a situation you have a lot of repercussions. I just met him once and I became suspicious of him in that one meeting. I never met him again. Dali, as we used to call Dilip, contacted this very man to take him to Sindh. The circumstances of his arrest are very dubious. This man took Dilip in his own jeep along with Sher Ali Marri; drove him from Quetta to Baelpat. He passed peacefully through Bolan and the whole area. In Baelpat, we had never seen a check post before. Yet, they were stopped at a relatively new check-point. The security forces asked for identification. The Kurd driver said, while referring to Dilip and Sher Ali Marri, they were Marris whom he had picked up on the way. They told Dilip and Sher Ali to get down and allowed the driver to drive off. The circumstances of his arrest also put a lot of suspicion on the driver. After that, we never heard of Dali because we think he was tortured to death within three months of his arrest.

MSA: How significant was the role of the London group in the entire movement?

AR: I was the right hand man of Mir Hazar Khan. I was his guerilla commander. He was the political and the tribal leader. All his politics were derived from our discussions and dialogue. We discussed socio-economic relations, governance, human rights and other issues with him. The London Group played a very vital role in awareness raising and empowering Mir Hazar and his commanders. I converted the traditional guerilla war tactics into modern tactics.

MSA: Balochistan’s politics is filled with so much suspicion. People often bill their rivals as agents of the intelligence agencies. There is one question which must be hitting the minds of my readers. If Dilip could be captured and killed and Najam Sethi arrested, why were you never caught? What was your role?

AR: I was arrested. In 1975, I had fallen seriously ill. I went to Karachi for treatment. My brother, Rashid, took me to a doctor who operated on me. Of course, we had alias names. This was exactly the same time when our names had been revealed. Rashid left Karachi and went underground.

A week after my operation, I was driving a friend’s car who had been looking after me throughout my recovery. He was also sitting in the car. As we approached his office, he asked me to stop near his office.
He wanted to pick up something from the office. While I waited in the car, I had my bandages and all. Suddenly, two people attired in plainclothes came close to me and pointed a pistol at me. I could not detect them because they were in plain clothes. They asked me to go with them. I asked the reasons for my arrest. They said they would tell me at the CID (Crimes Investigation Department) office. They drove my friend and me in separate cars to the CID office. On our arrival, I saw this friend of mine with the local DSP (deputy superintended of police). I silently showed my friend my fist, meaning that he should not reveal anything about my origin and activities. We had already made up a story about me with the police saying that I was a friend of his from school days who had come to Karachi to find a job. Because of not getting a job, he added, I was temporarily serving as his driver.

The DSP sat in front of me and asked who I was. I gave him my alias name and narrated an unreal story. He said I looked educated and decent just like the other detained friend of mine. He said he was surprised why we indulged in such “negative activities”.

The office from where this friend of mine was arrested was the same consultancy firm where Najam Sethi used to work as a cover. My friend already knew what we were actually doing.

The DSP introduced himself as Ashiq Hussain and said he had arrested us for our anti-state activities. I declined my links with “anti-state activities’. They questioned me for about half an hour. My friend and I stuck to the same story which we had made up. They kept us at the police station the whole night. In the morning, my friend called another friend of his to bail us out. The newcomer, on his arrival at the police station, said he identified the mutual friend but not me. My friend turned around and said he vouched for me because I was his driver. So, that is how we were released and immediately within an hour, I left Karachi with my bandage. I came to a Marri comrade’s house in Sindh where I stayed for two weeks until I could get rid of my bandages. Then I went to the mountains. Thus, this is incorrect to say that I was not arrested. It was just that they could not identify me and I guess I was lucky.

MSA: You said some of your friends back in Lahore ridicule you over fighting some “sardars’ war”. I would put the same question before you. When you look back at your activities of 1970s, do you think you were actually fighting a “sardars’ war”?

AR: No. The London Group’s long-term objective was to bring about a revolution in the whole of Pakistan. We wanted to bring the army back to its position of a public servant and defender of our borders under a civilian government that was in place. We wanted to make a democratic front that could bring about a change in the country’s political structure and institutions. We wanted a democratic system that upheld the rights of the people and which served the interest of the people on an equal and non-discriminatory basis.

MSA: Was it not adventurism on the part of a group of five young men to abandon everything and start a struggle for a revolution?

AR: We did not want to initiate a war. We expected that once we started, more people would join us. We were developing our links with the National Awami Party (NAP) and building contacts. We were trying to develop our links with the other leftist groups in Sindh, Punjab and Frontier because NAP was common to Balochistan and the NWFP. When the offer came to us from Khair Baksh Marri and Sher Mohammad Marri, that was, we felt, the ideal opportunity for us to go and work with the people of this country, not at the elite, middle class level or with the sardars of Balochistan.

In my whole interaction in that period with Khair Baksh Marri from 1971 to 1980, I only met him four or five times. So why would I be fighting his war?

Secondly, it was not a ‘sardars’ war’. Look, there are around 70 to 80 sardars and nawabs in Balochistan. At one time, when we were here, there were about 104 sardars and Nawabs in Balochistan. Now, there number has declined. Out of those 104 tribal chiefs, how many do you think were with us? Besides Nawab Khair Baksh Marri and Sardar Attaullah Mengal, can you count me any other Sardars who were with us? Ghaus Baksh Bizenjo was never a Sardar, nor was Mir Hazar Khan. So what are you talking about? If it was a “sardars’ war” then all the sardars and nawabs of Balochistan should have been on our side. In fact, Nawab Akbar Bugti was anti-NAP. That is why he became the governor of Balochistan. People who describe the Baloch struggle as a few sardars’ war in fact do not know the ground realities.

MSA: As an observer, what do you think is wrong with Balochistan? Why have the Balochs, unlike the Sindhis, Pashtoons and Punjabis, been able to integrate themselves in the federation of Pakistan? Why the need for a military operation always is felt after every ten years or why is it that the Balochs feel the need to pick up guns after short periods?

AR: To find an answer to this question, you will have to look at history. If you understand the history properly then you can answer these questions. In the first place, the State of Kalat (today’s Balochistan) was never a part of the British India or the Mughal Empire. It was a separate state which was self-ruled. This state was established in 1666 when democracy had no roots or influence in this area. The Ahmedzais actually established a confederacy of the Baloch tribes which was known as the Kalat State.
The British never ruled Kalat. They only ruled by proxy and through agreements that were made between the Kalat State and the British Crown in Delhi. When the Partition was taking place, Kalat made its case to the Partition Commission which came with Lord Cripps. The Kalat State made this plea that it had never been a part of the British India. It had remained a sovereign state. Therefore, it should be treated differently. When the Partition plan came about, the British offered the Kalat State three options.

Firstly, to remain independent and become a dominan of the British crown. Secondly, to merge with India and, thirdly, to merge with Pakistan. The Kalat State outrightly rejected two of these options. It said it would never merge with India or become a part of the British crown. They said they would remain independent and negotiate with Pakistan our merger because of disparity in political, economic and social development of the Kalat State as compared to the other areas of Pakistan.

Plus, the population of the Kalat state was much smaller than any of the other provinces. From that point of view, this was the status of 1947 when Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Pakistan’s founder, and the Khan of Kalat, Mir Ahmed Yar Khan, signed a stand still agreement on 11 August 1947. On 14 August 1947, Pakistan became independent while on 15 August 1947, Balochistan declared its independence.

I am sorry to say that but it was Mr. Jinnah himself who tried to force the annexation of Balochistan with Pakistan. He was forcing the Khan of Kalat to sign the Instrument of Accession. The Khan said he could not decide on his own and had to consult both the houses of the Baloch parliament –Dar-ul-Umra (the House of Lords) and Dar-ul-Awam
( the House of Commons). Consequently, both the houses of the Baloch parliament rejected unconditional accession to Pakistan and said they needed to have dialogue. If you read the Instrument of Accession of Kalat with Pakistan, which was finally signed by the Khan of Kalat without the mandate of the people of Balochistan or the members of the parliament, it is written that whatever constitutional structures are made by Pakistan will not be implemented in Balochistan without his and the peoples consent. It was agreed that there would be self-rule in the Kalat-state, which represented all areas of the present Balochistan.

Liquat Ali Khan, Pakistan’s first prime minister, tried to break up the Kalat State. Lasbela, Mekran and Quetta were made separate administrative regions in 1948 in an attempt to weaken the Kalat State. When they forced Ahmed Yar Khan to sign the accession, he was, immediately after signing, arrested and his brother Prince Abdul Karim went to the mountains as Mekran region was being forcefully taken away by Pakistan. Then Mr. Jinnah ordered the military officer of Quetta to prepare a brigade to invade the Kalat state. These were the instructions of Mr. Jinnah. We do not know what happened subsequently but he relented and asked the army to maintain the status quo. As a result, Mekran and Lasbela were once again given back to the Kalat State. Prince Karim was brought back from the mountains but put into the jail for ten years. Ahmed Yar Khan was also released. Again in 1958, when the Pakistan army invaded the Kalat State, took down the Kalat State flag and replaced it with Pakistani flag, Ahmed Yar Khan was arrested and put in house arrest in Lahore for ten years.

We call it annexation, not accession. It was a forced annexation and military occupation of the Kalat State by the Pakistan army. Ahmed Yar Khan was not personally adverse to accession with Pakistan. There was pressure on him from the people of the Kalat State and the parliament and there was pressure from Mr. Jinnah as well. It was a military occupation and annexation. That is why we say Balochistan has never been “governed”. It has always been “ruled” as a colony. You see when you capture any region or territory; you never treat it as an equal partner in the federation.

The question of Balochistan stems from 1947. This is what I always try and explain to my friends. They somehow don’t seem to understand because of the history studied by our friends in schools and colleges. The history they study at schools and colleges is the government’s version of the region. This is why it is crucial that I keep telling my Baloch friends that they have to write their complete political history. There are books such as Ahmed Yar Khan’s autobiography, Inside Balochistan, in which he admits that he did not have the mandate of Kalat parliament to accede to Pakistan.

MSA: Who do you think is responsible for not accommodating the Balochs in the federation of Pakistan?

AR: The Pakistan State, who else? The state has denied the Balochs their rights. Balochistan finally became a province in 1970. Before that, it was being ruled by a governor in Lahore, under One Unit. What I am trying to say is that once India and Pakistan were both colonies. Why did they start a movement for independence? Because they faced a similar situation. Over there, you also had military suppression by the British Crown. The people of India and Pakistan fought against it. Now, when we talk of Kalat (Balochistan) and how its independence was usurped, how they have been colonized and how they are demanding their rights, what is your answer? Your response is the same of the British colonial army that you start firing on them.

MSA: Many people would say we have to forget the past and look at the future. One feels that even there is ample realization in Punjab that Balochistan had not been treated fairly in the past. Is there a possibility for the future for Balochistan and Pakistan to coexist?

AR: The issue is that the state structures of Pakistan are not a federation. The structures are not of a federal set-up. They are a centralized government run by the state in a repressive and oppressive manner. The repression and oppression in the whole of Pakistan is at varying degrees depending on the number of people from those provinces and territories that are a part of the ruling elite. Who are the ruling elite in Pakistan? It is the army, the civil bureaucracy, the rich and the industrialists of the country. They do not want to include the Baloch leadership. They want to exclude them in all forms of decision making processes.

MSA: Why does this attitude exist against the Balochs only? Why not against the Punjabis, Pashtooons or Sindhis?

AR: Because Punjabis, Pashtoons and Sindhis are all part of the ruling elite. They don’t want to include the Balochs in this club of elite.

MSA: But they say Balochistan, ironically, has its own elite which has allegedly kept the Balochs backward and hampered all sorts of development in the Baloch areas.

AR: I agree. But you should see the level of development in Balochistan. There are no sardars or nawabs in Mekran (Turbat, Gwadar and Panjgur districts). There are no sardars in many other parts of Balochistan. The Sardar is no longer significant. It is an evolutionary thing. You can not impose an immediate change in social and political relations. What you can do is to evolve the people, not necessarily the sardars only, by giving them their socio-economic rights. You give the masses education, good health facilities and better economic opportunities so that they can stand before their own sardars. This change is not impossible. Look at Mir Hazar, for instance, who has challenged Nawab Khair Baksh Marri. Now, Nawab Marri and his sons can not go in the Bijrani region of the Marri area. Why? Because he has empowered his people.

I think our biggest contribution to the Baloch movement is that we sowed the seed of anti-nawab and anti-sardar thinking in terms of people’s rights. If Khair Baksh’s children, for example, are able to study at Aitcheson College or in London then it is equally the right of the sons of Mir Hazar and other Marris to go abroad and study.

That seed that we had embedded is what is being seen as a political development. Fortunately, this change is not occurring in the Marri tribe only. When the other Baloch tribes look at the Marris, they say why they should not apply the same model. That seed that we embedded in the Marris is now spreading across Balochistan and has become a small plant hopefully it will continue to grow. When we are talking about change in social orders, we cannot bring change in a very short period of time. It is an evolutionary change, a slow but progressive change.

MSA: So you are trying to say that the Baloch society is not stagnant but continuously evolving. How big an issue is tribal structure of Balochistan?

AR: Yes, the Baloch society is definitely evolving. It is not stagnant at all. The tribal system is no longer the issue. The issue is of economics, socio-economic development, and exposure of the Baloch social structure to the outside world. At the same time, education is very important. The younger generation needs to be educated. They need to be given skills. Human resource development must take place. The Balochs should be given an opportunity to earn an adequate livelihood.

MSA: Some Balochs complain that the federation has deliberately kept them backward. Do you agree?

AR: Yes, I do. Look at Sui where gas was discovered in 1952 and the gas went all over Pakistan except Balochistan. Sui town is half a kilometer from the gas refinery but it has no gas in the Baloch colony. Dera Bugti is another 50 kilometer away from the gas field but has no gas facility. Only in 1986, Quetta got gas but that too because of the military cantonment present in Quetta. Even today, if you look at consumption of gas in Balochistan, it is barely 2%. Out of 30 districts of Balochistan, only the main towns of four districts have access to the very gas that was discovered and supplied to the whole country since 1952 from Balochistan. The gas pipeline from Sui to Quetta passes two kilometers away from Sibi but Sibi has no gas. This whole thing has led to degradation of the environment. Trees are cut for firewood to cook food. Therefore, the rains are further reduced. This has subsequently generated water issues and deforestation in Balochistan where the underground water level has gone as down as 700 feet. The real question is ownership and control over the natural resources of any given area.

MSA: Some observers from outside find it difficult to describe the ultimate goal of the Baloch movement. Is it a movement that seeks maximum provincial autonomy or separation from Pakistan to found an independent Balochistan?

AR: When the movement started even much earlier than 1970, when we joined it, at that time the movement asked for sharing powers and control over their natural resources. This stemmed from the idea of self-rule and complete provincial autonomy in a federating unitary system. The Baloch movement has now been pushed to that point where they have started to actually asking for the right of self-determination.

MSA: Has this movement, which asks for right to self-determination or independence, arrived to a no-return point?

AR: If we don’t realize our mishandling of peoples rights and do something positive in the next year or two, I think then it will be too late. There is still a very thin and small chance to rectify the situation. If the Pakistani state realizes its mistakes and wants to keep Pakistan as it is today then it has to do something about it.

MSA: There is a hullabaloo in Balochistan about the target killings in Balochistan of the Punjabi settlers. You are a Punjabi who has worked very closely with the Balochs. How do you feel about it? Do you not think such cases are likely to alienate friends of Balochistan like yourself?

AR: It is a good question. Target killings are not confined to Punjabis alone. Hazaras and other ethnic communities are also the victim of target killings. Let me be very categorically clear and state this that it is not the Baloch movement doing this. Target killings are being done by some Balochs or Pashtoons agents of the intelligence agencies who are being instigated and paid to do this. In Mastung, for instance, two persons attempt to target kill a school teacher were caught red-handed by the members of the community. They turned out to be the personnel of an intelligence agency and possessed official service cards.

Currently, there is a lot of fear and resentment in the Punjab about these target killings.

There is another issue here. Some of the settlers, not necessarily just Punjabis, have been guilty of giving information to the intelligence agencies about guerilla movements. Unfortunately, Awami National Party (ANP) is also a part of it. They are now giving anti-Baloch statements from the Pashtoon side. I perceive that they (the rulers) are still following the same divide and rule policy in Balochistan and trying to pit the Pashtuns against the Baloch; Balochs against the Hazaras and the Hazaras against the Pashtoons. They have managed to develop a situation of uncertainty by creating ethnic rivalry among the people of the province. By doing so, they think they can destroy the whole Baloch movement in this way.

MSA: You have been emotionally attached with the Baloch movement. Do you also tell your children about your Balochistan experiences?

AR: As a very small supporter of the Baloch movement, I have even taught my son a little Balochi. In 1997, I brought two of my nephews and my own son to Marri area to show them how people lived there. I wanted them to know what the Baloch society looked like and what it was all about. I deliver lectures in Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) and other universities. The youth of the Punjab understands the problem of Balochistan. They lack current information. So it’s a little difficult to mobilize them on this issue.

MSA: Do you support the movement for an independent Balochistan?

AR: Any person who believes in the international human rights conventions has to support the independence movement of Balochistan. In any case, if the Baloch nation is suppressed and repressed for as long as 62 years and there is “genocide” going on then the Balochs have very right to seek self-determination. I will support them in anyway that I can.

MSA: What recommendations do you have for Islamabad to resolve the Balochistan crisis?

AR: The government should immediately take confidence building measures.
The government needs to address these issues immediately. 1) Withdraw the FC from Balochistan as they are promoting ethnic conflict. 2) Withdraw the army to the positions of 2000. 3) Release and give information of all missing or killed Baloch people especially the 150 odd women. 4) Cancel all agreements with foreign companies who are exploiting the gold-copper from Balochistan and the Gwader port authority. 5) Hand over these projects to the provincial government. 6) Release all political prisoners and student activists. 7) Move complete provincial autonomy as the priority legislation to be made for all provinces allowing only 3 or 4 subjects to the Federal government. 8 ) Taxation should be provincial subject with a share given to federal for its expenses. 9) All natural resources belong to the people of the district, province and not the central government.

The constitutional packages and all these things are nonsense. These packages do not solve the issue. They think they can buy the Baloch. Let me tell you categorically, you can never buy the Baloch. If you give the Baloch respect, they will give you respect. If you offer them friendship, they will give you friendship. If you share your bread with them, they will share their bread with you. If you try to take anything away from them by force, they will resist it till the last man.

Epilogue

The Pakistani forces once again started a military operation in Balochistan in 2004 which is still in place today. The operation killed Nawab Bugti, the chief of the Bugti Baloch tribe and a son of Nawab Khair Baksh Marri, Nawabzada Balach Marri.

Asad Rehman lives in Lahore and is currently working as Director Programs at a non-governmental organization, the Sungi Foundation.
Rashid Rehman is the Editor of the Lahore-based English language newspaper, Daily Times. He lives in Lahore.
Ahmed Rashid has become an internationally acclaimed journalist and writer of the internationally best-seller book Taliban. His latest book is Decent Into Chaos
Najam Sethi brought out Pakistan’s first independent English weekly, The Friday Times. He founded the Daily Times and remained its Editor-in-Chief for eight years and Daily Aajkal for two years until he resigned in October, 2009. Najam lives in Lahore with his journalist wife and author son. He was awarded the Gold Pen of Freedom Award by the World Association of Newspapers in 2009.
• Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur lives in Hyderabad and regularly writes about Balochistan’s issues in Pakistan’s top English language newspapers and magazines like Daily Times, Dawn and Newsline.
• Dilip Dass was never discovered. Neither his dead body nor the grave could ever be located. The Baloch Hal, Balochistan’s first onlin English newspaper, ran an exclusive photograph of his from school days in Karachi.

Taliban exist in Quetta: US diplomat October 14, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4 comments

US flag

DAILY TIMES
Thursday, October 15, 2009

Taliban exist in Quetta: US diplomat

* Stephen Fakan says Taliban should not be allowed to operate from Balochistan
* Lauds Pakistan Army for tremendous efforts against terrorism

By Malik Siraj Akbar

QUETTA: The Taliban are currently living in Quetta and need to be eliminated before they consolidate their grip in Balochistan and start to use the province as a base to launch more terror attacks, US Consul General Stephen G Fakan has said.

“It would be unreasonable to say the Taliban do not exist in Quetta,” the official posted at the Karachi Consulate told a press conference in Quetta on Wednesday. “Everybody is saying the Taliban live and operate from Quetta. The Quetta shura comprises people who devise policies for the Taliban while sitting in Quetta,” he added. He said Pakistani officials would be requested to do more and Islamabad “should do more” to fight the war against terrorism and extremism.

Not here: Quoting officials, he said some people in the Balochistan government had confessed the Taliban had moved from Quetta to Karachi and Islamabad without any restrictions. They pose a greater threat to the people of Pakistan than they do the interest of the US. “There is a need to take immediate action against the Taliban before they move from FATA to Balochistan and become powerful enough to use the province as a base for more terrorist activities in the future … We want to curb extremism wherever its is present,” he added.

The US consul general said no Balochistan government official had requested the US to play any role in sending Afghan refugees back to their country. “It is not that easy to locate Taliban hideouts in Quetta. We hear they keep coming (to Quetta) and going (to Afghanistan). Sometimes they are here and sometimes they go to the north. When the Taliban was removed from Afghanistan and FATA, it began to move to Quetta,” he added.

Valued job: Fakan said the Pakistan Army was doing a valuable job and putting tremendous effort towards fighting the Taliban in FATA. He said the US government acknowledged the army’s commitment to the war against terrorism. He also lauded the Frontier Corps (FC) for doing a good job to guard the NATO supplies, adding they had recently come under attack by militants in Quetta, Chaman and other parts of Balochistan. “It is not easy to avoid attacks on the convoy of trucks and tankers carrying supplies to NATO forces in Afghanistan as they move in large numbers,h he added.

The diplomat said he could not comment on whether the US government was seriously planning drone strikes in Quetta. He also termed the controversial Kerry-Lugar bill a sign of friendship between Pakistan and the US.

Shia-Hazara professionals under threat in Quetta October 13, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

HDP

By Malik Siraj Akbar

QUETTA: Sectarian target killing of Shia professionals continued in Balochistan’s capital Quetta on Tuesday after unknown motorcyclists gunned down the senior vice president of the Jamori Watan Party (JWP) along with his driver, police confirmed.

According to the details, another Persian-speaking Shia, Dr. Aslam Mirza, who was also the senior vice president of the Jamori Watan Party (JWP), was killed by unknown attackers in Quetta city along with his driver. Police said the slain doctor had just come out of a local poultry form in Akhtarabad area of Quetta when unknown motorcyclists opened fire on his car with AK147. The bullets hit Dr. Mirza on his head and body while his driver, who was identified as Gul Faraz, also received injuries on his head. Both the victims breathed their last on the spot.

“We strongly condemn the killing of a nice human being and committed political worker,” Shahzain Bugti, the provincial president of the Jamori Watan Party, told this scribe. He said JWP was the only Baloch nationalist party that accommodated the non-Balochs as well. The provincial government had failed to check the growing lawlessness in the provincial capital. “We will protest on the killing of our party leader on every platform. The provincial government must punish the elements involved in targeted killings. Currently, there is no writ of the government present in the province,” he added.

Shahzain also said that he would take up the issue with Balochistan Chief Minister Nawab Mohammad Aslam Raisani because the whole of Balochistan is presently in the grip of lawlessness and target killings.

Police said it was hunting for the culprits who killed Dr. Mirza but was still unable to make any headway in the murder case. Targeted killings of members of the minority Hazara and Shia communities have once again intensified in Quetta city. It was the third murder of a Shia professional in a period of two weeks.

On October 2, a senior Shia lawyer Vilayat Hussain had been target killed in Quetta city which led to the boycott of the courts’ proceedings by the lawyers in Quetta in protest. While the Chief Justice of the Balochistan High Court Fiaz Essa had issued directives to the provincial police to bring the murderers to justice, no breakthrough has been reported on the part of the police.

In a similar case of sectarian target killings, Balochistan’s Chief Mines Inspector Ashraf Ali was killed outside his office in Quetta on October 12. The police has equally been clueless about the killers of Ali.

The killing of the Shia-JWP leader comes a day after the issuance of a statement by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) in which the prime human rights body regretted the growing number of target killings against the Hazaras in Quetta city.

In a statement issued the other day, the HRCP had said an additional factor for insecurity and tension in Balochistan was the uninterrupted sequence of sectarian killings for the last six years. Quoting the representatives of the Hazara community, the HRCP said 270 members of the Hazara community had been killed since 2004.

Jan Ali Changazi, a Hazara minister in Balochistan government, told this writer that he believed the provincial government had failed to curb target killings of the Hazaras in Quetta city even after the deployment of the Frontier Corps.

“The Hazaras are being punished for being peaceful people. A Hazara lawyer was killed two weeks ago in Quetta. We have been raising the issue with the chief minister again and again. Unfortunately, the police have completely failed to deliver,” he added.

Changazi, a minister from the Pakistan People’s Party, said a mere increase in the number of forces would not stop target killings until the police and other law enforcement agencies started to operate effectively. He called for all members of the Balochistan Assembly to unite and address the issue of law and order. “These killings should not be considered only the “headache” of the Hazara community. We have to unite to bring to justice the elements that are ruining the peace of Balochistan,” he suggested.

It is interesting that those in the government as well as in the opposition equally believe that the Balochistan government has utterly failed to maintain peace in Balochistan and surmount the cases of target killings. On its part, the provincial government does not have the moral courage to at least accept moral responsibility for these cases that take place due to its negligence and bad governance.

BA condemns proposed drone strikes, US aid bill October 13, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
1 comment so far

dailylogo_new
Wednesday, October 14, 2009

BA condemns proposed drone strikes, US aid bill

* Lawmakers urge federal govt to summon US ambassador over her ‘unsubstantiated charges’ about Taliban presence in Quetta
* Reject Kerry-Lugar bill

By Malik Siraj Akbar

QUETTA: The Balochistan Assembly on Tuesday passed a resolution condemning proposed US drone attacks in the province.

Senior minister and the parliamentary leader of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI), Maulvi Abdul Wassey and Labour Minister Maulvi Ghulam Sarwar jointly tabled the resolution, which was adopted. Ministers and MPAs hailing from the conservative right-wing Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam took exception of the reports that Washington was contemplating to expand the drone assaults from parts of the NWFP to Quetta to hunt down Taliban leader Mullah Omar and the Quetta shura he leads.

The joint resolution urged the federal government to summon American ambassador Anne Patterson over her “unsubstantiated charges” about the presence of the Quetta shura and the Taliban in Quetta. They said such “irresponsible statements” could jeopardize the peace of the region and cause severe loss of human lives if drone strikes are launched.

On September 29, the ambassador had said that the Afghan Taliban “Quetta shura” was high on Washington’s list. She also showed concerns about the role of fugitive Taliban leader Mulla Omar and his council of lieutenants in Quetta. The resolution was endorsed by the leaders from all political parties, including Syed Ehsan Shah of the Balochistan National Party (BNP-Awami), Mir Sadiq Umrani of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party, Captain Abdul Khaliq of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Nawaz) and ministers from the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid.

They criticised the US for its recent claim that Al Qaeda and Taliban leadership were in Quetta. The lawmakers made it clear that such designs would be resolutely resisted. They condemned the attack on General Headquarters in Rawalpindi and termed it an attack on the whole country. They said such “irresponsible statements” could jeopardize the regional peace and cause severe loss of human lives if drone strikes are launched.

Wasay contended that the drone strikes would culminate in killing of innocent citizens and fail to achieve US objectives. Citing the example of the NWFP, he said drone attacks had proved counterproductive in the troubled province. “The US should shun a policy of applying violence. It should use diplomacy and trust the government of Pakistan in fighting the troublemakers. We have been the biggest victims of the war against terrorism. Therefore, it is illogical to accuse us of providing protection to the Taliban leaders. If drone attacks are carried out on our cities, we will resist in whatever way possible,” he warned. The Balochistan Assembly also rejected the Kerry Lugar bill by describing it an attempt to deprive Pakistan of its sovereignty.

‘Bachchan was the Coolie, but now, in movies, he only lives in villas’ October 13, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , , , ,
add a comment

roy

G Sampath Sunday, October 11, 2009

Even Bollywood has turned its back on the poor, says Arundhati Roy, the Booker prize-winning novelist who, over the years has become the most caustic critic of her own class, and of her country’s policies.
In the process, while winning new fans, she’s also alienated many who were drawn to her by her fiction. In an exclusive interview with G Sampath, Roy explains how her politics, as much as her fiction, defines who she is as a person

How would you categorise your politics?

I find it unnecessary for me to classify what my politics are. It’s really time to break out of thinking in so many of the ways in which we have thought. You stop thinking country-wise, then, you stop thinking Left and Right, because now the greatest capitalist nation in the world is Communist China, so all these things get overturned in some way or the other.
I think, now, with what’s happening ecologically, we need a different view. But one thing I do want to say is that, for all the things that are wrong here, the real worry is that there are so many things that are right, which are being dismantled and destroyed. For example, we still have people here who know the secrets of how to live lightly on this planet; people who know that when you challenge a consumerist society, it’s not as if you have to live with less happiness and less satisfaction; people who know that there is the possibility of ecstasy — all this is lost in other countries. It’s here still, and this is what makes one extreme, you know. You’re fighting to protect something, and that is fundamental to what I am– I think, when you fight to protect something, your anger is huge, because you just see this juggernaut of destruction destroying what ought to be at least the seeds of a future way of thinking, and we still have it.

The Financial Times review of your latest book, Listening To Grasshoppers, says, “The danger is that her extreme views… will alienate those whose support will be essential in India’s struggle for social justice in the years ahead.” This is a frequent charged leveled against you even by people who broadly, shall we say, empathise with your critiques. Many say that you “overdo it” and by being needlessly polemical, you harm the very cause that you are supposedly supporting.
When you are engaged in a critique on some very-close-to-the-bone issues, not everyone is going to stand up and applaud, and say, waah, beta, kitna achcha kaam kiya. The people who hold these opinions you mention have a voice, and also belong to a particular class. But millions of people who don’t have a voice, and whose opinions are not polled in these publications, believe just the opposite.
Supposing I was trying to please this lot, I would alienate the others. It’s not as if you can fight these battles and still have everybody on your side. Of course, some people are going to be alienated. Of course, some people are going to have opinions about how I write or don’t write. I can’t please everyone. I don’t have a problem with some people feeling hostile, some people feeling that I should have taken a ‘softly-softly’ approach, but that’s not me. To me, in fact, what finally gets written is after toning down even greater anger. If you go to a place like Dantewada now, even I feel like a moderate. So I am not really polling for popularity. But as a writer, I know who reads my work, and who it alienates.
I have spoken at places where 30,000 people have gathered, so I know what I am doing, and I am okay with the criticism also, because, well, The Financial Times and The Economist — these are the heart of what most people see as ‘the other side’. So there is going to be a conflict. I am not at all saying that I am somebody who makes no mistakes, but I just want to say that I know what I am saying, and I know how I am saying it,and I think about it, and I still do it.

Given the nature of your politics, how come you haven’t dissociated yourself from your big, MNC publisher and shifted to a smaller, perhaps not-for-profit publisher?

Well, I could also write these essays and stand outside the station and distribute photocopies. It’s very complicated. This system doesn’t leave you the option of being pristine. If you write a book, even if it’s a book on political stuff, you get royalties, you put it in the bank; even if you don’t do it, the bank invests the money in the stock market, so none of us can be pure, really. And if you are, then you have to live in your own purity and outside of engaging. In that pursuit of pristineness, you end up being ineffective in some way. I have to live with certain contradictions, as do all of us.

In your book, you speak of an ‘organic relationship’ between genocide and progress. Can there be an idea of progress that does not entail some form of violence?

Today, the idea of progress has come to mean just the western idea of progress and development, and a totally industrialised society. Of course, now with climate change, we have no choice but to imagine a different kind of progress, where perhaps everybody has less but your footprint on the earth is lighter. We have to go back to a totally different way of looking at consumption. Right now, the situation is that, unless you consume, the economy will collapse; but if you consume, the ecology will collapse — if you consume at the current rate. So in a way this is a good time for radical thought, but one doesn’t know if human beings are capable of it as a race, because we have historically seen societies collapse doing things that they know will cause them to collapse.

After the collapse of the Soviet experiment, socialism is today considered a discredited ideology. There seems to be a consensus now that there is no alternative to capitalism.

Capitalism has also equally discredited itself. If you look at the violence that it has unleashed. So both the ideologies have discredited themselves. One, because of a concentration of power — in the socialist countries we saw the concentration of power in the hands of a very few, who then misused it. And in capitalism, the concentration of power [as wealth] has become kind of malignant now. If you see how wealth is being concentrated, we can’t even think of it in terms of countries anymore. You have to think of the coalition of the world’s elite. Apart from the race for minerals like bauxite, etc, there is today a race for land. In places like Pakistan this had already started long ago. In India, we have our own corporate elite who’ll corner the land and start corporate agriculture. You corner the food, you corner the water, and you are back to the old colonial system of unleashing huge wars, which is what’s going to happen. Because you can’t take away the resources of so many millions of people, including water, and not expect there to erupt a war that, maybe you’ll try and contain with your army and the police, which is what India is heading towards.Beyond a certain point, given the number of people, what alternative do they have?
If the corporates have no alternative to capitalism, people also have no alternative to thirst, or to hunger. That’s why you’re seeing this increasing unrest. If it’s not addressed, then it will have to be addressed at some stage. But it will be more difficult to address once there’s a breakdown of the system, which is what we are seeing in Chhattisgarh and Orissa.
I think that it is possible to reverse this process — it’s not even a process — it’s an imagination, to re-imagine something. But at the heart of it will have to lie the idea of justice, and when I say justice, I am not talking about a utopian society in which everybody is equal because we know that it’s a utopia, but you have to indicate that you’re willing to move in that direction. But right now we’re moving in the opposite direction.

Historically, the middle classes have often been at the vanguard of progressive change in society — as in the freedom movement, for example. Are today’s middle classes performing that role?

The role of the middle-class in the freedom movement is a very complicated subject. The middle classes and the industrialists had a lot to gain themselves by stepping into the shoes of the British. But I also don’t subscribe to those who say that it was nothing – I think getting independence from the British was an important stage, but it stopped there, and then it began immediately to move in the other direction — immediately — starting with Kashmir. And the process began of excluding huge numbers of people.
Today, if the middle class could see its way through the noise of propaganda and information that’s been pushed at it, maybe some people will become a vanguard of change that leads to a kind of healing and sustainability. But now, I have to say that in India, particularly, there is kind of rot in the air. Because so many people have just moved into the middle class, it’s new for them, and so it’s very difficult to also expect them to question things — after all, they just got there. But unfortunately, it’s a bad time for them to have just got there. And unless there is a kind of vision and an urgency that sets in, we are heading towards trouble. Because every institution in the country is excluding the poor.

Can you give an example?
Since I am in Bombay, it’s fascinating, if you look at somebody like Amitabh Bachchan. How did he gain the place that he has in the hearts of the people? In many of his early films, he was the poor guy who grew up in the slums. He was like, mein sadak ka kutta hoon, and look at a film like Coolie — he was a Muslim, a coolie, and a trade union leader. There’s a battle against a corrupt minister where the minister holds a trishul and he has a hammer and sickle. And from there, to now, where in the movies, he only lives in villas and is getting out of helicopters, and those movies are only shown in these little cinema halls — multiplexes. Even Bollywood has completely walked away from the poor of this country. The cinema halls have changed and the cinema has changed to accommodate the cinema halls, or the cinema halls have changed to accommodate the cinema, I don’t know. But Amitabh is still adored because of the bank deposits that he made back then. And to me, there’s a terrible poignant tragedy in that.

The arrest of Maoist leader Khobad Ghandy — and before that, the arrest and release of Binayak Sen — has sparked off a renewed debate on the use of violence as a tool of struggle for justice, with many taking the stand that it is not permissible in a democracy. What is your position on this?
The Narmada Movement, the most spectacular non-violent movement of independent India, has been almost completely sidelined, ridiculed, humiliated. Travelling in the Narmada Valley where there’s been a nonviolent movement, or travelling in the Kashmir Valley where there’s been a violent movement, the point is that, every kind of dissent, whether it is violent or nonviolent, democratic or non-democratic, is crushed. So this is the situation that’s been created. You look at what happened in Lalgarh. They’ve arrested Chatrodhar Mahato. He is the leader of what is distinctly not a Maoist movement, but he is being called a Maoist. When I was travelling in Orissa — this was a few years ago — when the mining had just begun, there were no Maoists there. I spoke to many, many people there and they were all very wary of the Maoists, because they knew that if the Maoists come, there’ll be repression. But in every newspaper, they were going on saying ‘Maoists-Maoists’ because, they need to paint everybody as a Maoist in order for the repression to take place.
This debate about violence and nonviolence is an old one. But I think that debate cannot be an absolute one, based on absolute principles, as it becomes another debate over pristineness. Because even in India, if you take the example of our nonviolent movement for independence, you have to look at the context in which it happened. Britain was totally weakened by the war, it couldn’t sustain its control here and it had to leave. But do you think the Jews could have done [non-violent] Satyagraha in Nazi Germany?The Armenians could have done it in Turkey? Do you think the Palestinians could do it now? It’s complicated, and you’ll have to look at the context. I don’t think that whatever the adivasis in Chhattisgarh do, given the amount of bauxite and iron ore and the amount of profits, and the amount of zeroes that are coming out of that number… The violence of the assault by the state increases depending on how much profit there is to be made. This is the problem.

Is India in danger of becoming a police state?

What do you mean, “of becoming”? What do you think it is in Orissa and Chhatisgarh and Kashmir and Nagaland and Manipur and Lalgarh? Maybe it’s not a police state in Bombay though I am sure the surveillance is big time. You know, this Unique Identity Card, even the Conservative Party in English trashed it. Here everybody is saying it’s a great thing. You can’t give people water, you can’t give people schools, you can’t give people healthcare, but you can give them a unique identity card, and if they don’t have it, they don’t exist. So what are those 300,000 people hiding in the forests of Chhattisgarh now going to do? If they come out and get it, their land is gone; if they don’t get it, they don’t exist, and so they can be finished off, and it won’t be on the record.

You are known for your anti-statist views. But many activists, for example in education and healthcare, are working for change from within whatever spaces are available within the democratic framework. Do you believe that the state can serve as an agent of positive change?
I am somebody who talks about the bio-diversity of resistance, so I don’t want to say that working through the state is a ridiculous enterprise. Take NREGA. The same state that’s devastating and destroying and dispossessing people has come up with this Act. A lot of activists spend all their time trying to make sure that this little amount of money — 8,000 rupees a year or so — goes to who it’s meant to go to, and you cannot say that even that should not happen. And yet you know that it’s a way of keeping people busy, just about keeping them alive, and it was passed in order to mitigate a systematic dispossession. So, both things are important. The NREGA is the lifeline for so many people. But you can’t say that the NREGA is the solution to the problem; it’s just throwing some crumbs to the creatures under the table, while the feast goes on.

What are you reading just now?

I’ve just read this extraordinary book on the mill workers of Bombay, One Hundred Years, One hundred Voices by Meena Menon and Neera Adarkar.

Do you follow a fixed writing regimen?

When I write fiction, I have a very regimented schedule. As unregimented as the fiction is, the schedule is regimented. Right now, I’ve been trying to write this book of fiction, but I’ve been extremely worried about what’s happening in the forests, the troop movement, and the growing assault on the poorest people of this country, Operation Greenhunt. I don’t know why, first they called it Red Hunt, now they are calling it Green Hunt. When I am managing to write fiction, it’s regimented, but otherwise, when I’m traveling, I write however and whenever and wherever I can.

How far are you from finishing your second novel?

Very far.

Courtesy: Daily News Analysis (DNA)

Book Musharraf for Bugti’s murder: BHC October 8, 2009

Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.
Tags: , , ,
1 comment so far

dailylogo_new

Book Musharraf for Bugti’s murder: BHC

By Malik Siraj Akbar

QUETTA: The Balochistan High Court (BHC) on Wednesday ordered Dera Bugti district police to register a case against former president General (r) Pervez Musharraf and former prime minister Shaukat Aziz in connection with their alleged involvement in the murder of Nawab Akbar Bugti.

The directives were issued by BHC Chief Justice Fiaz Essa on a petition filed by Akbar Bugti’s son Jamil Akbar Bugti.

In his petition, Jamil appealed to the BHC to bring to justice Musharraf, Aziz, NWFP Governor Owais Ghani, former chief minister Jam Muhammad Yousaf, former interior minister Aftab Ahmed Sherpao and former Balochistan home minister Mir Shoaib Nosherwani for their alleged involvement in his father’s murder.

The court, however, observed that currently no FIR could be registered against the NWFP governor as he held a constitutional position.

Previously, Jamil Bugti’s plea for registration of a murder case against the killers of his father had been refused by a Sibi district court on the grounds that the murder of the Baloch leader had not occurred in the district.

Subsequently, the BHC accepted the petition and issued notices to top figures from the previous government.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.