A festering wound in Pakistan February 29, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in FYI.Tags: Anita Joshua, Congressional hearing on Balochistan
add a comment
(I was quoted in the following article written by Anita Joshua, the Pakistan correspondent of leading Indian newspaper, The Hindu)
By Anita Joshua
If Pakistan manages to weather the crisis it is facing with the demand for an independent Balochistan gathering steam, the nation may have to thank an American for it. An American who is presently a dartboard for the political class and opinion makers of a country that has mostly turned a Nelson’s eye to this festering province.
What Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher has succeeded in doing with his two interventions on Balochistan in the U.S. Congress is break the conspiracy of silence in Pakistan on its resource-rich but most backward, sparsely populated and largest province which makes up for 44 per cent of the country’s land mass.
Despite the perennial violence, disappearances and the ‘kill-and-dump’ phenomenon of mutilated bodies of the missing turning up along roadsides frequently, Balochistan has seldom been more than a footnote in mainstream discourse — in politics, the media and elsewhere. The Internet, which gave the Baloch a chance to tell the world what’s going on in their land, has a limited reach in Pakistan because many of these websites and blogs have been blocked here.
SIMILAR TO 1971
In fact, the collective silence on Balochistan and the bid to paper over the sense of alienation felt by the Baloch have been likened to the narrative that prevailed in West Pakistan about its eastern flank ahead of the 1971 War. Through the war, people were told via mainstream media that Pakistan’s victory over India was certain. Not just the media, even diplomats serving overseas were fed these lies by the Yahya Khan dispensation, according to retired diplomat Tariq Fatemi.
“A lot of media outlets are compelled to opt for a blackout of news from the conflict-stricken province because of pressure from the ‘higher authorities’ who cite the ‘sensitivity’ of the conflict vis-à-vis the national security paradigm as a serious concern,” maintains Malik Siraj Akbar, editor of The Baloch Hal, Balochistan’s first online English newspaper. Mr. Akbar was recently granted asylum in the U.S. after threats to his life. Needless to say, The Baloch Hal is blocked in Pakistan.
Earlier this month, a section of the media was shamed into breaking this orchestrated silence after a shutdown of all Urdu channels by cable operators across the province. Sindhi, Pashto, Baloch and Brahui channels were spared by the boycott call given by a faction of the Baloch Students Organisation.
The floodgates opened a week later, first with the exclusive hearing held by the Rohrabacher-chaired U.S. House Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations on human rights violations in Balochistan; and then, the resolution he introduced in Congress seeking the right of self-determination for the Baloch.
An incensed nation immediately saw Mr. Rohrabacher’s twin moves as interference in its internal affairs and wondered why the U.S. was silent on the Kashmiris’ demand for self-determination and human rights violations in the ‘Indian Held Kashmir.’
Suddenly Balochistan was trending — to use a social networking term — all over Pakistan’s media. Now not a day goes by without at least a couple of talk shows on Balochistan. Newspapers seem incomplete without a few articles on the province. This may stop in the electronic media as the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority has threatened action against the channels airing programmes featuring Baloch separatists.
How many withstand this diktat remains to be seen but anger over the American intervention has subsequently given way to some introspection as Baloch separatists living in exile made it clear that the time for sops was long gone and they would settle for nothing less than independence.
“What you read in the Pakistani newspapers and see on the television channels is barely the reflection of anti-Pakistan public sentiments prevailing in Balochistan. Pakistan has failed as a state to resolve issues which matter a lot more to the elite, such as the power crisis. No one is truly interested in Balochistan among the rulers. The politicians can’t fix it and the soldiers can only worsen it.
“The real thing that merits attention is the issue of demands. Many Pakistanis still do not want to hear the real Baloch demands but the Baloch movement is not meant for provincial autonomy. There is a full fledged movement for Balochistan’s independence taking place in the province. No matter what Pakistan provides them this time, it is not going to help.” With these words, Mr. Akbar sums up what is being articulated by Baloch leaders from various locations. Such is their anger now that they don’t mind being labelled Indian/American agents. In one television programme, Baloch Republican Party chief Barhamdagh Bugti’s retort to a question on whether he would take India’s help was: “Why only India? If satan offers help, we will take it.”
His is one of the many voices for separation being raised in the province. Although there is no data on how widespread the demand is, the separatists with their guns dominate the narrative as the ordinary Baloch is caught in the crossfire between them and the security forces. Given the frequency with which people are picked up, tortured and killed — the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan report of June 2011 said tortured bodies of 140 missing persons turned up between July 2010 and May 2011 — more families were getting affected by this kill-and-dump practice.
EMBITTERED BUGTIS
Though the Bugtis were once pro-Pakistan, the murder of Akbar Bugti in 2006 and the public celebration of the killing by the Musharraf regime embittered them. As opposed to greater autonomy within the federation, the demand for independence began gaining traction and several Baloch parties withdrew from the parliamentary process. Conscious that the strategic location of the province will remain the bane of their existence even if they get independence, so bitter are they now that an uncertain future is preferred to remaining within the federation.
Most of them have refused to participate in the All Parties Conference (APC) that the Prime Minister is planning, and rejected the Interior Minister’s offer to withdraw cases if they return from exile or their mountain hideouts as “hogwash.” When the government cannot get Frontier Corps — a military-headed paramilitary force — to remove one checkpost from the province, asked Federal Minister Israrullah Zehri, how can they withdraw cases?
Stating that the government’s offer [to drop cases against Baloch leaders] was good, Mehmal Sarfraz wrote in The Daily Times: “But who is going to ensure the safety of Barhamdagh Bugti and Hyrbyair Marri once they are back? The problem is the government cannot save the Baloch leaders from the military. Let’s not forget what happened to the Baloch leader Nawab Nauroz Khan. An oath taken on the Quran was violated by our military in his case.”
While mainstream political parties of the province are not for independence, Asad Rahman — who participated in the Baloch resistance movement in the 1970s — maintains that they have been silenced by repeated betrayals, atrocities and continued denial of rights to their resources.
A classic case is that of gas which was discovered at Sui in Dera Bugti in 1952. It was piped to all of Pakistan — foremost Punjab — from 1954 but Balochistan’s capital Quetta got connected to the pipeline only in 1985, points out Mr. Rahman.
According to him, the genesis of the present resistance goes back to 2002 when Pervez Musharraf handed over the Saindak project in the Chagai desert — with a projected annual yield of 1,44,000 tonnes copper, 1.47 tonnes gold and 27.6 tonnes of silver for 80 years — to a Chinese company. While the company was allowed to keep 75 per cent of the profit, the federal government got the remaining 25 per cent, of which just two per cent went to the province.
The development of the Gawadar port near the Straits of Hormuz by the Chinese cemented the fear among the Baloch that through this, the Punjab-centric establishment would try to change the demographics of the province and turn them into a minority in their own land.
Now the charge against the Baloch is that they are targeting settlers from other parts of Pakistan but the natives counter that proxies of the security establishment are involved in these killings to justify their presence in the province. As proof, they cite instances when killers of settlers have been caught and handed over to the police only to be whisked away by intelligence agencies who have viewed the Baloch with suspicion from the very beginning for their reluctance to join Pakistan, resulting in four earlier rounds of insurgency.
But none of them lasted this long. And those resistance movements were not for independence but rights. Demand for secession is a bitter pill to swallow for any country, more so for a nation that has been seeking strategic depth in Afghanistan at phenomenal costs to itself to counter the Indian behemoth.
‘FOREIGN HANDS’
As always, “foreign hands” are being accused of destabilising Balochistan with the aim to Balkanise Pakistan. Challenging this, Alia Amirali, a researcher on the Baloch National Movement, wrote in The News: “Rhetoric of ‘foreign hands’ has allowed for further militarization of Balochistan and given the military a licence to seal the province and make it a no-go zone where it can abduct, torture, kill and display bodies with impunity, extract Balochistan’s resources under the barrel of a gun, use Balochistan territory to conduct nuclear tests … There is one thing, however, that the military in Balochistan does not control: the spirit of the Baloch people.”
(Read the original article in The Hindu)
Waking up to the war in Balochistan February 29, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.add a comment
The nationalist insurgency in the Pakistani province of Balochistan does not often command international attention. But recent comments by US politicians suggest there could be a new appetite for addressing the conflict. BBC Urdu’s Amber Shamsi reports on how Baloch bloggers are leading the charge.
Balochistan’s long-running insurgency is all about greater political autonomy and the conflict has been brutal, with human rights groups accusing security forces of regularly detaining and torturing political activists.
Although the government has denied such accusations, activists insist their movements are closely watched and curtailed.
Malik Siraj Akbar is one victim of the tough stance taken by the Pakistani government.
“I became the bureau chief of a national daily at the age of 22,” he says. “I thought I had a bright future in Balochistan. Balochistan was my story. But I’ve lost my story.”
Mr Akbar is a journalist and blogger who was forced to seek political asylum in the US after he received threats from the government and intelligence agencies. His e-paper, Baloch Hal, was one of those that was shut down and the reason – he believes – that he was targeted. He has now had to substitute the dusty, conflict-ridden provincial capital of Quetta for a quiet suburb of Washington DC.
For the last eight years the insurgency has gone largely unnoticed by Pakistan’s mainstream media and by foreign news organisations.
It is a murky conflict in which underground nationalist groups and Pakistan’s paramilitary and intelligence agencies are the main players. The insurgency encountered setbacks in 2006 during the presidency of Pervez Musharraf. Baloch nationalist leader Akbar Bugti was killed at that time during an army operation.
Since then the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) appears to have been determined to block sites in Balochistan which are critical of the Pakistani state.
Since 2006, Pakistan’s telecommunication authority has blocked nearly 4,000 websites. Most of them are pornographic or contain blasphemous material, but a lot are those deemed “anti-state”. Many of these are websites, blogs and YouTube videos from the province of Balochistan.
Extra-judicial killings
Talking to the BBC, a PTA official said it was the government and not the telecoms authority that censors web content in Pakistan.
The PTA is reluctant to release the numbers and types of websites that have been blocked, and to date there has been no research into the exact number of Baloch websites on the forbidden list.
Given that many keep changing URLs and names, putting a finger on numbers is made all the harder. But Mr Akbar estimates that there must be hundreds.
“All over the world, the freedom to express oneself is best done through social media websites and blogs. We don’t [officially] have that right in Pakistan,” he says.
According to the Bytes for All organisation working to promote internet freedom in Pakistan, disappearances, illegal torture and extra-judicial killings of journalists, lawyers, students and political activists have increased rapidly throughout Balochistan in recent months.
It says that these developments received an “almost total blackout” by the Pakistani media.
But recently, Baloch nationalist groups have tried to fight back against media censorship. They asked cable operators to block the transmission of mainstream Urdu news channels throughout the province in protest over what they say is their refusal to cover Balochistan’s conflict.
“Reporters do send in the news, but there are no local voices from the interior or any in-depth analysis on the issues,” says Aurangzaib Khan, a representative of Intermedia pressure group.
He says that the kind of journalism being practised in the province is “forced”. “Reporters are made to report on stories that are not even newsworthy because they are under all kinds of pressure.”
He blames three forces responsible for “putting the screws” on journalists – the military, militants and separatists.
Blogging for truth?
But where the news media struggles, blogs flourish. Malik Siraj Akbar says that the world now looks to these blogs for news from the province.
For example, when UNHCR official John Solecki was kidnapped in 2009, the story was first broken by bloggers, he says.
But can blogs provide a holistic, impartial picture of Balochistan? After all, not every blogger is necessarily an objective and independent journalist.
I managed to track down one such blogger, a 29-year-old businessman who wants to remain anonymous for fear of retribution.
“We have to direct attention towards human rights abuses first. We are tortured and killed, as if we are not even human. First human rights must be restored in Balochistan, and then we can talk about women’s rights,” he says.
While human rights abuses in Balochistan have got scant attention in the rest of Pakistan, it is an issue gaining traction in Washington.
A US Congress Oversight and Investigations Committee recently held a hearing on human rights abuses in the province.
The Pakistani government has reacted strongly to the hearing, describing it as tantamount to “meddling in Pakistan’s internal affairs”.
But Malik Siraj Akbar says that this hearing is an achievement for Balochistan’s bloggers and human rights groups.
“In a sense, this is like Balochistan’s mini-Arab Spring, and the credit goes to those bloggers who have risked their lives to bring truth to the fore.”
But given that many bloggers are sympathetic towards the Baloch nationalist point of view, Aurangzaib Khan has a pertinent question.
“Who is telling the real story of Balochistan?” he asks. (Courtesy: BBC News)
Censorship Returns to Pakistan February 28, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Op-Ed.Tags: Censorship Returns to Pakistan
add a comment
By Malik Siraj Akbar
The Pakistan government has decided to impose fresh curbs on the country’s independent broadcast media. The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), which provides licenses to the channels and is also empowered to revoke them, has issued harsh warnings to the media houses, enjoining them to refrain from giving air time to opposition leaders of the troubled Balochistan province.
The Baloch leaders have vocally criticized Pakistan’s powerful military for grave violations in the country’s largest province of Balochistan. They have blamed the intelligence agencies linked with the army for subjecting hundreds of political activists to disappearance, torture and death. The opposition leaders’ stance is backed by international human rights groups like the Human Rights Watch and the Amnesty International. They have also been demanding the release of hundreds of political opponent s who have gone “missing” since the dictatorial regime of General Pervez Musharraf. The disappearances continue even after Musharraf’s exit and the restoration of democracy.
According to The News, the PEMRA says programs that feature Baloch opposition leaders, “not only amount to sedition but are also against explicit provisions of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority… failure to refrain from airing such programmes or talk shows detrimental to Pakistan’s existence would be met by the Authority by invoking its law.”
Recent restrictions have been imposed in the wake of a hearing of U.S. Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations on the conflict-ridden province of Balochistan. The hearing condemned the Pakistani government’s atrocities against its own people in and supported the native Baloch people’s right to self-determination to get rid of the abusive regime. The hearing opened floodgates of criticism on Islamabad’s policies in Balochistan while some other opposition leaders say they want to create an independent homeland for the Baloch.
Islamabad has now decided to suppress the voice of the Baloch leaders who seek independence by dictating the channels not to air their point of view.
The PEMRA is often manipulated by the army as a tool to reprimand news channels that encourage such objective and fair reporting which hurts the interests of the powerful elite. Founded a decade ago by General Musharraf, the PEMRA was once seen as a remarkable facilitator of liberalization of the private news industry. Before the openness of broadcast media, Pakistanis had access to only one state-controlled Pakistan Television (PTV). The liberalization in 2002 opened doors for a fearless and often aggressive world of broadcast journalism. The fledgling industry gradually transformed into such a powerful agent of democratic change that, in 2002, it eventually culminated into the ouster of its architect General Musharraf.
As time passed, PEMRA turned into an authoritarian body and began blackmailing the free press under the pretext of the “national interest”. In Pakistan, the so-called “national interest’ is not defined by democratic leaders throughout parliamentary consensus. Instead, the military generals, who have staged three coups since the creation of the country in 1947, interpret the ‘national interest’ aiming to suppress political dissent and criticism.
PEMRA’s pro-military slant has encouraged some rightist media outlets to promote Islamic fundamentalism, intolerance, intrusion into people’s privacy and endorsement of a culture of moral policing. On the other hand, channels with a more professional approach face cancellation of their licenses or heavy penalty if they air reports or talk-shows that directly criticize certain invulnerable centers of power such as the military.
Today, PEMRA has shrunk into a body that jeopardizes the freedom of expression in Pakistan.
The Express Tribune quote the PEMRA general manager, Fakhruddin Mughal, defending the fresh instructions despite disagreeing with the analogy of the fresh advice with the censorship Pakistan witnessed during the dictatorships of General Ziaul Haq and General Pervez Musharraf.
“These programmes look like they were recorded in Washington or Delhi and the anchor persons are some foreign agents… The views… were not opinions rather they were abuses for our state and this behaviour of TV channels could not be tolerated.”
Ironically, the PEMRA does not issue similar warnings to channels that promote radical Islam, jihad, religious sectarianism and hatred toward religious minorities.
Journalists in Pakistan look at the government’s fresh moves as a method to restrict the freedom of the expression and force them to adhere to an editorial policy that favors the government interests.
The executive of a private TV channel, who was quoted by the Express Tribune, termed the official curbs as “arm-twisting tactics” which were intended to “bully the media.”
“They [the government] must realise that people must know all shades of opinion… “This is not the time of press advices and regulatory bodies having their will imposed on the private media. Pemra is not the sole custodian of national interest. Let the people watch and decide what is in favour of the country and what is not.”
Besides censoring private news channels, Pakistan also imposes significant censorship on online publications such as blogs and web-based newspapers in Balochistan.
Unlike television censorship, the task to curtail internet freedom is performed by another body called the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA).
According to the BBC Urdu Service, the PTA has blocked around 4000 websites, mostly those run by the Baloch political opposition. The PTA, just like the PEMRA, defends blocking the websites by applying the vague term of “anti-Pakistan” which is often used to settle scores against political rivals.
In 2010, the authorities blocked the Baloch Hal, an online English language newspaper that exclusively focuses on Balochistan. The Freedom House, in its Freedom on the Net 2011 report, said, “the authorities have cited Section 99 of the penal code, which allows the government to restrict information that might be prejudicial to the national interest. On the contrary, Marcus Michaelse, in his study New Media vs. Old Politics, described The Baloch Hal as “an excellent example of local and/or regional reporting through the internet.”
“Run by a very small editorial team the website provides information and analysis on Pakistan’s probably most underreported province. However, access to the website has been blocked due to the authorities’ apparent sensitivity concerning information on the conflict situation in Baluchistan,” he observed.
In another recent controversial move, Dawn.com, the online edition of the country’s most reputed English language publication, deleted the interview of one of the witnesses who had testified at the Congressional hearing on February 8. Although the interview remained online for a few hours, it was eventually removed from the site because of its allegedly harsh contents critical of the Pakistani army. Likewise, activists belonging to the opposition parties also complain that even professional editors trash their online comments which bitterly criticize the policies of the army.
Ironically, the editor of Dawn newspaper is a brother of the army’s spokesman while another influential member of the family that runs the paper is Pakistan’s ambassador to the United Nations. Such overlap of interests is believed to be another reason for frequent compromise of editorial policy at certain media houses.
Increasing censorship in Pakistan is becoming a source of constant concern in a country that is transitioning from dictatorship to democracy and conservatism to modernity. The future of a stable and democratic Pakistan largely hinges upon a free and fair press. Ranked as the world’s deadliest place for reporters for the past two consecutive years, the government’s new restrictions will further convert Pakistan into a country that remains hostile to the freedom of expression. (Courtesy: The Huffington Post)
EVENT: Pakistan’s Balochistan Conflict: Causes and Implications February 28, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Events.Tags: Balochistan events in Washington DC, EVENT: Pakistan’s Balochistan Conflict: Causes and Implications
add a comment
The National Endowment for Democracy
Cordially invites you to a brownbag panel discussion
Pakistan’s Balochistan Conflict: Causes and Implications
featuring
Dr. Quratulain Bakhteari
and
Mr. Malik Siraj Akbar
Friday, March 2, 2012
12:00 pm – 1:30 pm
7th Floor Multi-purpose Room
1025 F Street NW
Washington, DC 20004
Dr. Quratul Ain Bakhteari grew up in a refugee camp on the outskirts of Karachi after the creation of Pakistan in 1947. After completing her B.A. degree, she helped new refugees coming from Bangladesh by providing them with basic health care and education. She established 2,000 government girls’ primary schools in rural Balochistan, resulting in the enrollment of 200,000 girls — a record in Pakistan’s history. With the help of the Asia Foundation, she formed the Institute for Development Studies and Practices (IDSP) in 1999. From 1992-1997, she designed and promoted a method of educating girls in Balochistan, called the Community Support Progress (C.S.P) which became the official policy for girls education in Balochistan. Along with UNICEF, Dr. Bakhteari mobilized 5,000 families and constructed household latrines, a practice which has now become a basic sanitation policy for the low-income population in Pakistan. She earned a Masters degree from Karachi University and later completed her Doctorate from University of Technology in Loubrough, England. She has been recognized as a Skoll Foundation Social Entrepreneur and was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006.
Mr. Malik Siraj Akbar is an award-winning Pakistani journalist affiliated with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as a Reagan Fascell Democracy Fellow. The founding editor of the Baloch Hal, Pakistan’s first online local newspaper, he has served as the Balochistan bureau chief of the Daily Times, Pakistan’s leading English-language newspaper (2006–2010), and as a Hubert Humphrey Fellow at Arizona State University (2010–2011). A recognized regional expert, he is the author of The Redefined Dimensions of the Baloch Nationalist Movement (2011), as well as numerous articles on press freedom, human rights, religious radicalism, and the war on terror in Pakistan. Malik’s articles are published in Huffington Post, Foreign Policy Blogs, the Times of India, the Hindu, Dawn, the Friday Times, The News on Sunday and Express Tribune.
Please note that this is a brownbag presentation and no lunch will be served. Contact Wilson Lee at 202-378-9577 or wilsonl@ned.org to RSVP or for any inquiries. (See the announcement on NED website)
Dawn.com exclusive interview: Ali Dayan Hasan February 28, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Interviews.Tags: Congressional hearing on Balochistan, Dawn.com exclusive interview: Ali Dayan Hasan, Malik Siraj Akbar interview with Dawn.com exclusive interview: Ali Dayan Hasan, Saleem Shahzad
add a comment
By Malik Siraj Akbar
The New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) has been actively highlighting human rights abuses in Pakistan in recent times. The organisation’s Pakistan Director Ali Dayan Hasan has attracted a lot of attention in the media during the past few months, due to his vocal stance on human rights violations in Balochistan and the murder of journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad.
A former senior editor at the Herald, a reputed Karachi-based current affairs magazine, Hasan was a Visiting Research Fellow at the Leverhulme Changing Character of War Programme at the University of Oxford. He has a bachelor’s degree from the London School of Economics and a master’s degree from St. Antony’s College, Oxford. He spoke exclusively to Dawn.com during his recent visit to the United States.
You recently participated in a controversial congressional hearing on Balochistan. Can you tell us what you spoke about at the hearing?
Our position is that all governments and influential actors must pressure each other to adhere to international human rights standards. It was in pursuance of this aim that we testified, hoping that our presence and intervention will highlight serious human rights abuses by all actors in Balochistan. We expect both the US and Pakistan to pressure each other to respect human rights and to follow respective relevant national and international laws that oblige rights protections.
We made it clear that Balochistan was an internationally recognised province of Pakistan and HRW expected Pakistan’s constitutional protections for citizens to apply to those who live in the province. HRW explained that while the state – through its army, intelligence agencies and paramilitaries such as the FC – was the “engine of abuse,” Balochistan presented a complex picture with multiple abusive actors. We detailed not just large-scale disappearances, targeted killings and other abuses by state authorities but also the killing of settlers by Baloch nationalists and the killing of Shias by Sunni extremists. HRW also emphasised that the US Congress must examine US complicity with former president Pervez Musharraf in effecting the disappearances of al-Qaeda and Taliban suspects, and how it allowed Musharraf to extend heinous practices such as disappearances to political opponents in Balochistan. We outlined the complex ethnic mix and demographics in Balochistan, emphasising that at least 40 per cent of Balochistan was, in fact, non-Baloch.
What was the significance of this hearing given the outrage it has generated in Pakistan’s political and military circles. How do you think the international community can help in influencing Islamabad to deal with the situation in Balochistan?
Let me clarify once again that Human Rights Watch holds no sympathy for Congressman Dana Rohrabacher’s eccentric political views. We even found the inclusion of some witnesses such as Ralph Peters – who has no known expertise on Balochistan and spouts bizarre political views – worrisome. However, we felt it was far more important that a balanced and nuanced human rights analysis, based in international law rather than political posturing, be placed on the record in the US Congress. Our colleagues at Amnesty International (AI) appeared to share that view and hence testified.
The fact is that international rights groups such as HRW and Amnesty, and in Pakistan, the highly respected, HRCP (Human Rights Commission of Pakistan) have been sounding alarm bells about Balochistan for several years. HRW has produced countless press releases and two in-depth reports on abuses by all sides, but the abusers – particularly the army and its security agencies – have ignored these repeated appeals or responded with angry denials, and in fact, state abuses have worsened in Balochistan.
Countries are not made or broken through hearings or resolutions in the US Congress. That is only up to the people of a country, but least this hearing and Congressman Rohrabacher’s ill-advised resolution has forced Pakistan’s political and military leaders to pay attention to the human rights hell in Balochistan.
HRW expects the international community, acting strictly within the ambit of international law, to exert all possible pressure on Pakistan to end such abuses. And equally, Pakistan’s political parties and leaders must do their duty by finding political solutions to political disputes. If that requires uniting to confront the army and telling it that abuses in Balochistan must end, so be it.
In what ways is the human rights situation in Balochistan continuously deteriorating and why? What needs to be done to restore peace?
HRW has documented disappearances, which have continued despite the return to constitutional rule in 2008. The federal government, which in 2008 was willing to acknowledge large-scale disappearances, has been unable to prevent abuses by FC and intelligence agencies and has resorted to bare-faced denial.
In 2008, Interior minister Rehman Malik admitted 1100 people were missing. Today he claims that less than 50 are missing, which is nonsense. The on-ground research performed by HRW suggests that considerably more than 50 people have disappeared since 2008 alone. Further, HRW has documented some 300 killings of Baloch nationalists in the last 18 months in “kill-and-dump” operations. While the judiciary has repeatedly tried to address the issue of disappearances in Balochistan, its attempts have been less than successful in the face of intransigence by those perpetrating these abuses. This is a disaster and it requires politicians to confront the military, which is basically running security policy in Balochistan and tell it to end abuses. Period. Political disputes can only be resolved through political measures and not through brutality and military might.
Of course, this situation is complicated by Baloch nationalist attacks on non-Baloch settlers and HRW is the only international group to have documented those abuses in detail. It is a fact that Punjabi and Urdu-speakers are living in fear of their lives in Quetta today. Additionally, HRW has also documented the killings of some 300 Shias, mostly from the Hazara community since 2008. For the most part, militant groups such as the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have claimed responsibility for these attacks. Many in Balochistan believe that these extremist groups, which undoubtedly have enjoyed close strategic relationships with the army, continue to operate at its behest.
Do you think the government is responsible for this state of lawlessness and lack of accountability?
It is the responsibility of the state to enforce a rights-respecting rule of law and in that the federal and provincial governments have completely failed. Either it is time for them to seriously address that failure by confronting the security apparatus or to categorically say that they cannot control their own intelligence agencies and paramilitary forces.
It is simply untenable to say you want peace and be party to the torture, disappearance and killing of people at the same time. There can be no peace in Balochistan unless the army, the FC and the intelligence agencies are part of the process and are willing to change their ways. So, this requires both the leadership and pressure by the politicians that should be used on the one hand rein in the security forces and to bring Baloch nationalists to the table on the other. Unless both things happen concurrently and real confidence-building measures are put in place, offers of amnesty or of quashing cases against Baloch leaders will simply be seen as political honey-traps designed to lure Baloch nationalists back only for the state to turn its guns on them again.
The interior minister has said that foreign powers are involved in causing instability in Balochistan. Do you accept this?
In principle, HRW does not reject the possibility that third parties may also be perpetrating abuses in Balochistan. However, mere claims by the interior minister, the intelligence agencies or the government are not enough in the absence of evidence. If the government of Pakistan can provide tangible evidence of India, Afghanistan, the US or any other country’s involvement in human rights abuses in Balochistan, HRW would not hesitate to demand accountability of such parties. The fact is that there is basically no evidence on the record offered by Pakistani authorities to back up such claims.
How satisfied are you with the findings of the Saleem Shahzad murder inquiry commission?
HRW has made clear that it does not find the commission’s findings satisfactory as it failed to meet the terms of its mandate, which included the identification of the perpetrators. This is not to suggest that the commission may not have tried but the indisputable fact is that it failed.
HRW has never said that Saleem Shahzad was murdered by the ISI, but we have maintained two positions with reference to Saleem Shahzad’s murder. One, he was categorical that he was being repeatedly threatened by the ISI and we believe that prior to his murder he was in the custody of the ISI and the location, manner and method of his abduction bore the hallmark of similar incidents where the ISI and other intelligence agencies were the accused. Second, given the overwhelming circumstantial evidence around his abduction, the discovery of his body meant that the ISI was the principal suspect in that criminal investigation.
As the ‘Adyala 11’ case is demonstrating yet again, extreme violence by intelligence agencies of illegal abductees is commonplace. While the commission may have failed to hold the ISI accountable, it has raised serious concerns about the relationship between the ISI and journalists and documented allegations of harassment and intimidation by the ISI.
The sad fact is that to date, no intelligence personnel have ever been held accountable for the hundreds of such allegations that abound. HRW is deeply encouraged by the Supreme Court’s recent attempts to address this culture of impunity. It is our hope that the investigation will continue and the perpetrators of Shahzad’s murder, regardless of who they are, will be identified and held accountable.
Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) have condemned HRW for “falsely implicating” the ISI in Saleem Shahzad’s murder and asked your organisation to withdraw its statement. Their statement has also questioned the credibility of your organisation. How would you respond to the impression that the HRW is being used by the US government to defame the Pakistan army?
Frankly, I find the ISPR statement bewildering at multiple levels. First, HRW is an international human rights organisation headquartered in New York (as is the UN) but with offices across the world. We take no money from the US or any other government. Our work is funded by private donors and you can find a list of these on our website. HRW has a global reputation for integrity which has made it one of the largest human rights organisations in the world today.
Secondly, HRW has been one of the most strident critics of US abuses – particularly in the area of counter-terrorism and we have unequivocally called for senior members of the Bush administration to be held accountable for torture. We do not hesitate to hold any abusive actor to account including the Indian military. In fact, HRW is one of the leading voices calling for the repeal of the abusive Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) that allows impunity for Indian military abuses in Kashmir and the insurgency-hit North East.
Third, HRW would be more than pleased to engage in a constructive, meaningful and transparent organisational dialogue with the army through ISPR or otherwise on areas of disagreement or mutual concern. However, we are perturbed by the Stalinist turn of phrase employed by ISPR in its public responses to HRW. Consider the last ISPR statement; in a Kafka-esque twist, it refers to Saleem Shahzad’s murder as an “alleged murder.” The murder is a fact not an allegation. Bizarrely, it cites the ongoing Adiyala 11 case as proof that it is accountable to the Supreme Court. We hope that this turns out to be true but it remains to be seen whether the military will allow its personnel to be held accountable. It seeks to twist facts to suggest that HRW is part of a “sinister media campaign,” whereas HRW has been upfront and absolutely clear. The “sinister media campaign” is in fact being run by others acting in sympathy with a perceived “national interest” that argues that asking for people to not be tortured or killed is an attack on Pakistan.
HRW does not have any innate animosity towards the ISI or the Pakistan Army and in fact we are on record as saying that the initial, “active” phase of the Swat operation (Rah-e-Rast) was conducted with relatively few violations of international humanitarian law. Serious abuses such as extra-judicial killings only followed later in the “hold” phase. We highlight abuses and seek for those to end and have no hostility towards any state, government or military per se.
The ISPR have specifically mentioned you by name twice, as has a statement issued to the state-run news agency, by an anonymous spokesperson of the ISI after Saleem Shahzad’s body was discovered. Do you think this is justified or do you feel threatened?
I am very sorry that the military authorities are choosing to personalise what are organisational positions. I am a Pakistani who represents an internationally respected human rights organisation. It is my job to provide research-based critiques based in international human rights law, international humanitarian law and in light of the fundamental rights provisions of Pakistan’s constitution. I have done this job for almost a decade and persist in doing it because I care deeply about Pakistan and want my country to be a better place, not because I want to malign it. Like many Pakistanis, I too aspire for dignity for my country in the world and I, too, have relatives who have served in the armed forces.
Turning a blind eye to bigotry, prejudice and abuse is neither patriotic nor ethical. As a Pakistani, I look forward to the day I can tell the world with pride that Pakistan is a rights-respecting democracy that does not allow its law enforcement agencies or security forces to abuse people. I hope to see that day in my lifetime. Given this context, I hope ISPR will consider avoiding issuing statements that are easily read as threats. There is nothing as abhorrent as feeling threatened by those who are meant to actually keep you secure. Let us discuss and debate facts dispassionately without prejudice and in a manner which is not menacing.
What is HRW’s stance on drone strikes in Pakistan and how have citizens’ rights been violated?
HRW considers CIA drone strikes a deeply troubling issue that raises serious human rights concerns. Last year, the US carried out about 75 aerial drone strikes which resulted in claims of large numbers of civilian casualties. Lack of access to the conflict areas has prevented independent verification and HRW has repeatedly called on the Pakistan army, which controls access to the conflict zone to provide the same.
Little is known about who is killed in CIA drone strikes in Pakistan and under what circumstances. HRW has stated categorically that this unaccountable free-for-all operation, whether with the covert support of Pakistani authorities or without, is unacceptable. Given that the US resists public accountability for CIA drone strikes, they should simply not be happening. The drone strikes should end. (Courtesy Dawn.com)
The author is a freelance journalist based in Washington DC.
Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship February 28, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.Tags: Malik Siraj Akbar Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship, National Endowment for Democracy, Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship
add a comment
I am delighted to share a good news with my blog readers: The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) has awarded me the Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellowship. Starting on March 1st, I will, during my five-month fellowship tenure, research the death and disappearance of defenders of democracy, such as political leaders, activists, human rights activists and journalists, in Pakistan, particularly Balochistan, the country’s largest province.
The fellowship, which enables democratic practitioners, scholars, and journalists from around the world to deepen their understanding of democracy and enhance their ability to promote democratic change, is named in honor of NED’s principal founders, former president Ronald Reagan and the late congressman Dante Fascell.
To read my profile and the research project on NED’s official website, please click here
Indifference or blackout February 26, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Editorials.Tags: Indifference or blackout, Malik Siraj Akbar in TNS, Pakistan media and Balochistan
add a comment
By Malik Siraj Akbar
The previously overlooked fury in Balochistan against the mainstream media has gradually transformed into full-fledged public expression of dissatisfaction with how the national media covers the troubled province. Disgruntled young Balochs blame the media, particularly the private news channels, for allegedly building up the entire crisis in Balochistan by not objectively and completely reporting the conflict since its inception. They say neither are they pleased with the amount of coverage the country’s largest province gets in the news bulletins, talk shows and documentaries nor are they appreciative of some journalists’ pro-government depiction of the situation in Balochistan.
At the beginning of February, this disillusionment led the Balochistan National Party and its student wing the Baloch Students Organisation (BSO-Mohiuddin group) to boycott the private news channels across Balochistan and Baloch-populated parts of Karachi. While Balochi, Sindhi and Pashtu channels were exempted from this boycott, cable subscribers in most Baloch districts did not receive service of the news channels for several days.
“The Pakistani media discriminates the Baloch,” charged Agha Hassan Baloch, a lawyer and BNP’s information secretary, “everyday, young Baloch activists are being killed and dumped by the security forces but there is a total blackout of news from Balochistan.”
Hassan complains that stations promptly flash “breaking news” tickers out of unimportant events taking place in principal cities but more urgent reports from Balochistan entailing human rights, suffering and poverty even do not manage to get listed on the news rundown.
Unanimous protests
In October 2010, the Azad faction of the BSO, which calls for Balochistan’s independence, asked the people of the province to stop reading newspapers printed from Lahore, Karachi and Islamabad because, it said, they did not contain sufficient account of the military operation and disappearances of nationalist leaders. The BSO eventually ended its boycott after assurances from journalists’ bodies in Quetta that their concerns would be conveyed to the publishers of newspapers living outside Balochistan.
As the indifferent policies of the national media toward Balochistan remain unchang-ed, methods of protest are becoming harsher by the day.
For instance, on February 22, a Lahore-based daily reported the burning of its newspaper bundle in Quetta by some ‘unidentified people’ who had also interrupted the distribution of the channel’s programmes in Balochistan. This reactionary attitude did not come out of blue. Sources in Quetta say a talk show, run on a news channel owned by the same newspaper’s publisher, had been used as a platform by a leader of General Musharraf’s Awami Pakistan Muslim League to incite the killing of a notable Baloch political leader, besides calling him a “donkey” and “stupid” in a live talk show. The talk show host, on the contrary, defended the abusive guest by calling his views “valid” which further incensed the supporters of the Baloch leader.
The three political groups cited above, which have protested against the media at different times, represent totally divergent schools of nationalist thought. Yet, they collectively share the same grievance that there is not ample and accurate reporting of Balochistan. This feeling has gone down and made them feel as if the media is responsible for the ignorance of the rest of the country about Balochistan and lack of corrective political measures on behalf of the government policymakers.
Total blackout
The blackout of news from and about Balochistan is now being viewed as an integral part of the broader conflict. This phenomenon dates back to the history of print journalism in the province. Local newspapers never thrived in Balochistan because of several factors. First, dearth of advertisement revenue because of the absence of manufacturing industries and private companies dissuaded newspapers owners from launching papers in the province. Second, the vast terrain, scattered population and poor road infrastructure further prevented the timely dissemination of newspapers across the region. Above all, widespread illiteracy in the province made newspapers a less appealing medium as compared to radio.
Up till now, not a single major news channel or publication has its headquarters in Balochistan. With the exception of a few, most media outlets even do not have bureau offices in a province which is believed to have perhaps the highest number of untold stories. All sides of a story do not reach the audience because all media organisations do not have paid reporters in Balochistan’s remaining 29 districts. Reporting about Balochistan takes place from Quetta, the provincial capital. While an opportunity to travel inside Balochistan is rare for the Quetta-based correspondents who are oftentimes overburdened with work because of small teams, funds for travel and investigative assignments is another improbability.
The Balochs grumble about the lack of representation in media outlets. Many national and international media organisations such as the BBC, the Voice of America, DawnNews, The News International, Geo, Associated Press of Pakistan etc. do not have Baloch correspondents who should be able to speak the local language and report about the problems faced by people living in rural areas.
Likewise, head offices provide funding to their senior correspondents when they have to cover an election or a natural calamity such as floods and earthquakes. Ironically, the only occasion when a large number of reporters from “big cities” get an opportunity to see the province is when the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) or Frontier Corps (FC) embeds them to show some “positive development” work done by the military. Such tours are normally a futile exercise as the embedded journalists do not get to see the full side of the picture.
In fact, their predictably appreciative post-trip write-ups of the military are the only outcome of such large gathering of reporters. But this is what these official trips on C-130 planes are intended to achieve.
New media
Protests against and boycott of the national media indicates the increasing awareness among the nationalist groups about the significance of the use of media to promote their objectives. Despite the intensification of the conflict, Balochistan has not been an attractive destination in terms of making money for media tycoons who have refrained from establishing studios or printing presses in Balochistan. Similarly, correspondents from other provinces even do not get an assignment or a fellowship from their papers to spend some months, instead of days and weeks, in Balochistan to develop a better sense of the local culture and aspirations.
Paradoxically, the news from Balochistan has started reaching out to a larger audience because of social media and blogs. Nationalists use the internet to spread their message. Although the government has restricted access to hundreds of websites and blogs, social networks like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have become an effective and popular source of educating the people living outside Balochistan to make better sense of things.
Some popular Baloch online sources include Crisis Balochistan, the Baluch, Baloch Unity, Baloch Warna and Baloch Voice.
Social media and online journalism is a good way to instantly share information but it is still not a right replacement for explanatory, investigative and objective journalism, which is needed to see all sides of the Baloch picture. People in rural areas still do not have access to the internet and they largely depend on news channels and radio shows.
In order to better understand Balochistan and its people, there is an immediate need to invest in developing the capability and capacity of the local media and journalists. Entrepreneurs should be willing to experiment initiatives, such as locating the headquarters of channels to the province, hosting talk shows from Balochistan and widening Balochistan’s share of air time in order to give the Baloch a sense of ownership and participation in the news industry. Government’s neglect of the province’s issues is not as dangerous as is the negligence of the national media.
This article was originally published in The News on Sunday
Balochistan and its ‘jealous husband’ February 21, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Malik Siraj Akbar.Tags: Balochistan and its ‘jealous husband’, Malik Siraj Akbar
add a comment
By Malik Siraj Akbar
When she last visited Islamabad, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had a Pakistani woman tell her, during a town hall-style meeting in Islamabad, that the relationship between America and Pakistan was that of an unappreciative mother-in-law (the mother-in-law of course being America). A similar analogy also applies to Islamabad’s relationship with Balochistan. To me, the Centre acts like a suspicious husband with Balochistan, always in doubt of the latter’s loyalty and fidelity.
In fact, carrying the jealous husband analogy further, I would say that what we see happening in Balochistan these days is like an angry husband beating up his wife, the wife screaming for help, while the husband gets angry upon seeing the neighbours running to help and protect the wife. Instead of correcting his ways, he starts berating the neighbours, screaming at them to mind their own business. And in that context, if the beating of up a woman symbolises a man’s cowardice, then brutalising an ethnic minority, made up of its own people, also reflects a state’s cowardice and shame.
Unfortunately, ours is a history marked with lies, distortions, exaggerations and false glorification. Can’t we at least pay attention to some bitter truths and grim reminders? For all the flak that US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (Republican from California) is getting from Pakistan’s media and official circles, the fact is that he is gaining popularity by the day, especially among the young people of Balochistan, some of whom have already set up a Facebook fan page for him. At last count, he had over 3,000 fans and this number will only rise.
So, the news channels are fooling and misleading the country when they show a ‘patriotic Pakistani’ from Islamabad or Khyber-Pakhtunkhawa, instead of a talking to a Baloch from Gwadar, condemning the developments taking place in Washington DC. Why is there such reluctance to trust the Baloch and speak to them to learn what has alienated them and what they demand? When was the first (and probably the last) time when the whole country demonstrated unity to address what is happening in Balochistan? How many long marches, breaking news stories and parliamentary resolutions are going to happen before the government addresses the matter at hand?
Let’s stop the ‘internal affair’ drama and focus on some historical facts? Since Pakistan’s inception, Islamabad has spied on the Baloch. Perhaps the Baloch did not respond to the fact that they were treated unequally and disrespectfully but over time they became pained by being billed as Russian, Indian, Afghan and even Iraqi agents. Of course, now they are going to be treated as ‘CIA agents’! Did Islamabad ever embrace the Baloch as respectful and dependable citizens of the land who could be trusted and given ownership and responsibility?
Surely, we all remember what happened in 1973 when the first-ever elected Baloch government was dismissed. As if disregard for the Baloch mandate of provincial government was not enough, the people of the province were then subjected to a horrendous military operation on the charge of having ‘extra-marital affairs’ with foreign countries. In six decades, Islamabad has not been able to present undisputed proof of Balochistan’s unfaithfulness while there are countless accounts of the formers patriarchal arrogance towards the province.
An ardent pro-Pakistan leader like Nawab Akbar Bugti was killed on suspicion of getting ‘foreign assistance’. Former chief minister Akhtar Mengal was literally put into an iron cage because General Musharraf thought he was not sufficiently patriotic. Bramdagh Bugti was called an ‘Indian agent’, and his sister and niece were killed. Hundreds of young Baloch have been found dead in recent months, dumped along roads in the province.
While a troubled relationship between a mother-in-law and her daughter-in-law can endure despite all flaws, marriage between a quarrelling couple has a painful, yet, internationally and legally acceptable choice: divorce. The Pakistani ‘patriots’ should ask themselves that are their actions pushing Balochistan to the brink of divorce.
This Article Was Originally Published in The Express Tribune on February 22nd, 2012
Pakistan Unites Against Rohrabacher’s Pro-Baloch Congressional Resolution February 21, 2012
Posted by Malik Siraj Akbar in Op-Ed.Tags: Dana Rohrabacher, Malik Siraj Akbar, Malik Siraj Akbar article in Huffington Post, US congressional hearing on Balochistan
add a comment
By Malik Siraj Akbar
When Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher concluded a controversial hearing of Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations on February 8 calling for the Baloch people’s right to self-determination in the southwest of Pakistan by saying “this was certainly not a stunt on anybody’s part,” he simply meant more staggering developments had yet to come.
Hence, on Friday, Rohrabacher went a step further and introduced a House Concurrent Resolution reclaiming the “Baluchi (sic) nation has a historic right to self-determination.” (Balochi is the language the Baloch (people) speak.)
A press release issued from the office of Mr. Rohrabacher said Congressmen Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Steve King (R-IA) were among the original co-sponsors of the bill.
“Historically Baluchistan was an independently governed entity known as the Baluch Khanate of Kalat which came to an end after invasions from both British and Persian armies. An attempt to regain independence in 1947 was crushed by an invasion by Pakistan. Today the Baluchistan province of Pakistan is rich in natural resources but has been subjugated and exploited by Punjabi and Pashtun elites in Islamabad, leaving Baluchistan the country’s poorest province,” says the resolution.
The Times of India headline “Balochistan resolution in U.S. Congress drives Pakistan crazy” offered a succinct but an apt description of how Islamabad went berserk about the increasing support in Washington DC for the Baloch nation whose people, land and rich mineral resources had been colonized by Pakistan’s Punjabi elite for more than six decades. In addition, the Balochs, more than any other ethnic minority in Pakistan, have faced severe brutalities and human rights violations in the hands of the powerful army.
Pakistan is an insecure nation when it comes to its dealings with India and, particularly, the United States. According to the state narrative provided in the hateful textbooks, India aims to destroy Pakistan’s “Islamic identity” while contemporary literature more emphatically suggests that the United States is determined to dismember Pakistan and take away its nukes. These feelings in fact provide the genesis of Pakistan’s reactive and oftentimes intrusive foreign policy toward its neighbors and the west.
Marvin Weinbaum, a South Asia expert at the Middle East Institute, recently called Pakistan a country in a state of paranoia, arguing that it possessed all symptoms a medical dictionary can offer to describe a paranoid person.
Islamabad’s reaction to the Congressional hearing reaffirms the same level of paranoia that engulfs the Muslim majority nation. For more than 30 hours, state and private news channels have featured the “breaking news” about the Balochistan resolution as their top headline with incessant news tickers which “condemned,” “deplored,” “regretted,” and “warned” against the U.S. interference in “our internal affairs.”
No wonder that more Pakistani journalists and politicians are Googling Mr. Rohrabacher these days than searching for Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney! In fact, the “meddlesome villain,” as journalist Fahad Husain described Rohrabacher, has got more air time than President Obama.
Hina Rabbani Khar, the hawkish foreign minister whose links with the anti-Baloch establishment date back to the regime of former dictator General Musharraf, has termed the draft resolution a “tendentious move” which is “contrary to the principles of UN Charter and international law.” Cleverly overlooking parts of the same UN Charter which also recognize people’s right to self-determination, the minister says the resolution is against the very fundamentals of the long-standing Pakistan-U.S. relations.
What we are confronted with at this point is Pakistani officials’ lack of understanding of American political system and how politics works outside their country. Although the State Department has clearly distanced itself from Rohrabacher’s stormy move, Pakistan is blaming the U.S. government for orchestrating this episode.
Pakistan’s overreaction is likely to lead to two significant outcomes.
Firstly, the feeble civilian government headed by the Pakistan People’s Party is gradually succumbing to the pressure of the power-starved military in order to ensure its own political survival. The staunchly anti-U.S. army has been desperately hunting for a subterfuge to freeze relations with the United States. This Balochistan resolution, Pakistanis assume, will exempt them from all forms of accountability before the world concerning their tacit support to Taliban fighters who attack American interests. The more Islamabad shuts down doors of contact with Washington, the more steps it will take to consolidate the grip of the Taliban in a future Afghan dispensation.
Secondly, the army will remain adamant toward calls to end human rights violations in Balochistan as a confidence building measure to pave the way for a political resolution of the worsening conflict. Instead the military, which is deeply resented by the native Balochs but dominated by the Punjabis, is now destined to deploy more personnel and construct cantonments to terrorize the Baloch under the pretext of national security.
Considering the way all political parties, larger provinces and the national media have ganged up against what the Baloch consider and celebrate as their democratic victory against an oppressing regime, Islamabad will eventually end up further estranging the Baloch.
The Baloch ethnic minority justifiably wonders if Balochistan was actually Pakistan’s internal matter then why the country’s politicians, particularly those from the largest province of Punjab, did not ever unite in the past six decades to move a resolution calling for an end to the military operation and exploitation of the Baloch. By denying the army’s “slow motion genocide” in Balochistan, as veteran American journalist Selig Harrison calls it, Pakistani politicians and the national media have indicated to the Baloch that they prefer to stand with the country’s military not the masses. (Courtesy: The Huffington Post)
