How biases, discrimination fuel insurgency – Firstpost

Pakistan, perpetually on the precipice, has plunged into chaos once more. The latest crisis began on March 11, when the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), a separatist group seeking independence for Balochistan from Pakistan, hijacked the Jaffar Express train, with more than 400 passengers aboard across its nine coaches. At the time of the hijacking, the Jaffar Express was on a 30-hour journey from Quetta, the provincial capital of Balochistan, to Peshawar, the capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. The BLA extremists reportedly blew up the railway line and launched an attack on the Jaffar Express, taking the passengers as hostages.

Truth vs Untruth

After a 30-hour standoff, Pakistan’s security services claimed to have ended the hijacking. However, it is difficult to assess how many passengers were rescued, as different agencies reported three different numbers: 190, 346, and 354. Regarding the death toll, the Pakistan Armed Forces revised their earlier numbers from 26 to 33 dead, apart from 33 BLA fighters also killed. Contrarily, the BLA released a statement claiming its fighters escaped with 214 hostages, all of whom were executed, with the victims all belonging to the Pakistan Armed Forces. It remains difficult to determine which version is correct.

India Falsely Blamed

On Friday, March 14, Pakistan’s armed forces claimed that the hijacking of the Jaffar Express was carried out by “terrorists” whose handlers were in Afghanistan. Then, Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, the Director General of the military’s media wing, Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), notoriously stated during a news conference in Islamabad, “We must understand that in this terrorist incident in Balochistan, and others before, the main sponsor is our eastern neighbour [India]”. New Delhi rightly rejected this claim as baseless and asked Pakistan to introspect.

Failing, Failed, and Failing Again

This piece briefly illustrates the tale of Pakistan, a misconceived, stillborn nation that has comprehensively proven itself a failed state. It also highlights how, after its troubled birth, gripped by strong fissiparous tendencies, Pakistan is in a perpetual state of withering away. Discerning readers are encouraged to read this in continuation of my
earlier
piece, Pakistan’s Destiny: Democracy, Autocracy, and Military Interventionism, published on February 11, 2024, in Firstpost. That piece narrates the comprehensive story of how Pakistan was born and how it has reached its present state.

Before delving further, here is a brief recap of the inherent problems in Pakistan’s very conception.

Flawed Conception

I have no hesitation in saying that the very birth of Pakistan, based on the “Two-Nation” theory, was not only flawed but a hatched conspiracy of the British. Pakistan was created by politicians for the benefit of politicians. Even after partition, 35 million Muslims stayed in India, and today, India is home to the world’s third-largest Muslim population.

By Chance

Though it is difficult (and in this case, impossible) to rewrite history, history beckons that had the Congress accepted the Cripps Mission proposals, there would likely not have been a country named Pakistan today for India to deal with. If Congress had joined the war government, the Quit India Movement would not have been launched. Mahatma Gandhi would not have been in jail until 1944 and other Congress leaders, including Jawaharlal Nehru, until 1945. During this period, Mohammad Ali Jinnah hobnobbed with the British. Churchill got his ‘bit of India in the name of Pakistan,’ which he wanted. Congress leader KM Munshi, quoted by journalist and author Utpal Kumar in his book Bharat Rising: Dharma, Democracy, Diplomacy, said, “Today we realize that if the Cripps proposal had been accepted, there would have been no Partition, no refugees, and no Kashmir Problem.”

I repeat a paragraph from my earlier piece: “It is worth noting that, despite the resistance of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, the Cripps Mission was an idea of his wartime British Deputy Prime Minister Clement Attlee. Author David Reynolds, in his latest book Mirrors of Greatness: Churchill and the Leaders Who Shaped Him (October 2023), writes that the idea of the Cripps proposals originated in June 1938, when Attlee spent a weekend at Cripps’ country house, where he and other Labour politicians met Jawaharlal Nehru and sought to move on from the failure of the Government of India Act, 1935.”

But it was not to be.

Partition occurred, bringing with it the world’s largest two-way displacement of humanity and the killing of over two million people in the name of religion. India has been handed an unstable and belligerent neighbour for the past 78 years.

Pakistan Dismembered

The idea of Pakistan, with one part in the “East” and another in the “West” based on the “Two-Nation Theory,” did not last long. East Pakistan became Bangladesh on December 16, 1971, when the Pakistan Army, led by Lt Gen AAK Niazi and its 93,000 soldiers, surrendered to the Indian Army and the Mukti Bahini (Bangladesh’s liberation forces), marking the end of the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. The creation of Bangladesh stemmed from a combination of political, economic, and cultural disparities between East and West Pakistan, culminating in a brutal crackdown and genocide, leading to liberation, the declaration of independence, and ultimately, the formation of Bangladesh.

Configuration

Apart from the comedy of errors at its birth, Pakistan’s existential problem lies in its configuration. Administratively, Pakistan consists of four provinces: Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab, and Sindh, along with the Islamabad Capital Territory. Additionally, Pakistan illegally occupied two regions: Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan.

Punjab Dominance and Ethnic Divide

Notwithstanding the ethnic diversity in Pakistan, the country’s politics, administration, economy, and armed forces are predominantly dominated by the province of Punjab. Unsurprisingly, ethnic divides and militancy, with demands ranging from autonomy to political reorganisation and independence, have been persistent throughout Pakistani politics.

At the heart of Pakistan’s troubles is its inability to translate its socio-cultural diversity into political terms, a central issue for its persistent political instability. Even the legitimate grievances of other ethnic groups have been construed as rebellion, and Pakistan has consistently responded with coercive measures, regardless of the type of government (civilian or military). It will not be out of place to say that the Pakistani state’s response to ethnic demands has consistently been shaped by ‘law and order’ thinking and the ‘assimilation’ hypothesis, rather than a dignified accommodation of the diverse ethnicities.

Unsurprisingly, fissiparous tendencies are now threatening to destroy Pakistan, while its overwhelming preoccupation remains Kashmir.

Compulsive Obsession

While Pakistan remains fragile, bordering on economic bankruptcy and facing potential physical disintegration unless immediate changes are made, the compulsive obsession of Pakistani politicians remains “Kashmir, Kashmir, and Kashmir”.

Pakistan remains obsessed with wresting Jammu and Kashmir from India, especially after losing East Pakistan in the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. However, having failed miserably in all its attempts in the past, this frustration has deeply vexed Pakistan’s deep state. But frustration will not give Pakistan J&K. Rather, if turmoil continues, one day—sooner or later—Pakistan-occupied Kashmir will reunite with Bharat. It is instructive to note that Pakistan as a nation state has already imploded. Here is the story.

The Implosion

Pakistan has imploded owing to the extraordinary internecine conflict that rages in the country. The year just gone by proved to be the deadliest year for Pakistan in recent history. Here are some grim statistics:

One, as per the figures compiled by the Pakistani newspaper Dawn quoting official sources, at least 685 members of security forces lost their lives in 444 terror attacks, making 2024 the deadliest year for Pakistan’s armed forces in a decade.

More alarming were the cumulative losses of civilians and security personnel: 1,612 fatalities, accounting for over 63 per cent of the total recorded in 2024 and marking 73 per cent more losses compared to 934 supposedly eliminated.

Two, as per the annual report 2024 of the think tank Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS), in 2024 Pakistan had 2,546 terrorism and violence-linked fatalities and 2,267 injuries among civilians, security personnel, and outlaws. This tally of casualties stemmed from 1,166 terror attacks and counter-terror operations, marking a grim year for the country’s security landscape.

Three, as per yet another report according to the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), security forces conducted a total of 59,775 operations in 2024 in which 925 ’terrorists’ were killed and 383 armed forces personnel were casualties. These figures were stated by ISPR Director General (DG) Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry during a press conference on December 27.

The above marks nothing short of an implosion. What is more worrying is that violence took the heaviest toll on Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), which topped human losses with 1,616 fatalities, and in Balochistan, which was a distant second with 782 fatalities.

What if Balochistan Secedes?

Pakistan, for all its troubles in Balochistan, blames India but never looks inward.

Here is the Balochistan story: Balochistan, the largest province of Pakistan, comprises 43.6 per cent of the total area of the country and is rich in natural resources like gold, copper, oil, and natural gas, while boasting a 770 km (478-mile) stretch of coastline, where the strategic Gwadar Port is located—a key feature of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

But the tragedy of Balochistan is that, despite its wealth in natural resources, it remains the poorest province in Pakistan. Worse, the Baloch ethnic group, which constitutes a third of the population, has been consistently marginalised due to the Pakistani government’s discriminatory policies. These policies have viewed the entire problem through the lens of insurgency, leading to military operations and the abduction of innocent people by the state.

At the core of this marginalisation is the deep antipathy towards Pakistan’s state and military, which has sparked armed resistance and rebellion.

For decades, successive Pakistani governments (whether civilian or military) have responded to the Balochistan issue with force, aiming not only to decimate armed groups but also to demonise and terrorise the Baloch community. Even Baloch political activists and politicians who have sought peaceful, legal solutions have been branded as “terrorists”.

When Pakistan was born, Balochistan was not a part of Pakistan and was independent for at least 227 days. It was only through manipulation by Jinnah and Pakistan arm-twisting Baloch leaders that Balochistan was forced to merge with Pakistan. Even then, when the latest cycle of protests began in the first decade of this century, the demand was limited and reasonable—“an equal share of the province’s resources for the Baloch people”. But Pakistan has learned no lessons from history. When legitimate demands go unmet, all roads lead to secession, sooner or later.

Over to Pakistan

As the recent events indicate (the hijacking of the train and the more recent attack on the armed forces convoy), the crisis in Balochistan is taking a dangerously irreversible turn, fueled by insurgency, political exclusion, poor governance, and resource exploitation. If Pakistan is to save itself from devastation and disintegration, it needs resolve, dialogue, accountability, and genuine political reform. Because if Balochistan goes, Pakistan can blame India for the creation of Bangladesh, but it will only have itself to blame if it loses Balochistan.

And if Balochistan goes, the marginalised Pashtun community—Pakistan’s second-largest demographic group, which faces persecution, discriminatory laws, and hostile attitudes, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and the former Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)—will be waiting in the wings.

The author is a multi-disciplinary thought leader with Action Bias and an India based impact consultant. He is a keen watcher of changing national and international scenarios. He works as President Advisory Services of Consulting Company BARSYL. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.