Rape and famine are rampant in Sudan, the world’s forgotten disaster zone

The United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights,...

U.S. double-standard on terror weakening Indo-Pacific security

Senior US officials are blissfully unconcerned about...

Delhi Cong to bring out ‘chargesheet’ against BJP MPs

Voting for the seven Lok Sabha seats...

India can provide hope to the Baloch struggle

opinionIndia can provide hope to the Baloch struggle

Narendra Modi’s accentuation of human rights violation by Pakistan in Balochistan has echoed in the Westminster. Self-exiled Baloch leaders in Europe, who have been highlighting that their land was forcibly occupied by Pakistan in March 1948 have been spurred by Indian Prime Minister’s statements in August last year. Modi voiced his concern from the ramparts of the Red Fort while addressing the nation on the 70th anniversary of the departure of the British from the Indian subcontinent. A month later, on 14 September, India’s representative to the United Nations described Pakistan as a “country which has systematically abused and violated the human rights of its own citizens, including in Balochistan”. With this India flagged the plight of the Baloch in the comity of nations. 

Baloch leaders addressed a seminar in the premises of the House of Lords in British Parliament this week and declared that they would approach India, Iran, Afghanistan and the international community in their struggle for an independent Balochistan. The charge was led by Mir Suleiman Ahmedzai, the present Khan of Kalat, whose ancestors were the rulers of most of Balochistan during British rule. 

Kalat and its fiduciary states Lasbela, Kaharan and Makran were independent of British rule—it had a treaty arrangement with the British. When India’s Partition Plan was announced on 3 June 1947, the then Monarch (Khan) of Kalat, Mir Sir Ahmad Yar Khan Ahmedzai had made his intention of retaining his suzerainty over Balochistan clear in his meetings with the Viceroy, Lord Louis Mountbatten and with Pakistani leaders. A series of meetings were held, in which Mohammed Ali Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan represented Pakistan.

On 4 August 1947, ten days before the British departed, an agreement was reached in which it was categorically stated that Pakistan would recognise the sovereign status of the State of Kalat “which has treaty relations with the British Government and whose status and position is different from the other Princely States of India”. Legal opinion was to be obtained if the nascent State of Pakistan could be the successor to these treaties. (The sovereign status of Kalat thus was never in doubt.) A Standstill Agreement was signed between Pakistan and Kalat on 11 August 1947.

On 12 August, the Khan of Kalat declared that Kalat would be an independent state from 15 August 1947. This independence lasted 227 days, till the Pakistan army marched on land and Pakistan navy gunboats reached on 28 March 1948. The Monarch acceded to Pakistan at gunpoint. There have been five major and many minor uprisings in Balochistan since. 

Jinnah as lawyer had represented the Khan of Kalat in his negotiations with the British prior to the announcement of the Partition Plan in June 1947. As things did not work out post Partition, instead of seeking legal opinion as envisaged in the 4 August agreement, in October 1947 Jinnah asked Kalat to accede to Pakistan. The Monarch refused. Around the same time Pakistan had sent armed tribesmen into Kashmir.

The Khan of Kalat approached India for support of his sovereignty. He wanted a status similar to that enjoyed by Nepal. Besides India, Kalat approached its western neighbours, Iran and Afghanistan for help. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was preoccupied with the Kashmir skirmishes and the process of integrating 562 Indian princely states was foremost priority for Deputy Prime Minister Sardar Vallabbhai Patel. The Monarch dispatched Samad Khan, who had been a member of the All India Congress Committee, to plead with the Congress president, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad. Other prominent Baloch leaders, including Ghaus Baksh Bizenjo (who later served as Governor of the Pakistani province of Balochistan) also visited New Delhi. The Indian leadership’s preoccupation with Kashmir, Hyderabad and other post-Partition internal problems eclipsed the Baloch plea for help. 

On 27 March 1948, AIR (All India Radio) quoted V.P. Menon, Secretary of the Department of States (who, along with Patel played yeoman role in integration of India) as saying that the Khan of Kalat had approached India for accession and India was not in a position to do anything. The next day, Sardar Patel contradicted his Secretary. But it was perhaps too late. Pakistan army and navy had moved in and the Khan of Kalat, who had heard the AIR broadcast the evening before, surrendered his sovereignty at gunpoint. On 30 March, Premier Nehru also contradicted Menon. But history had moved on.

Perhaps the Indian leadership then thought that Balochistan, with no contiguity to India, could not be supported or amalgamated. Pakistan had been created with non-contiguous province of East Bengal (this name remained till 1956, when it was named East Pakistan). 

With the present Khan of Kalat, Mir Suleiman Ahmedzai asserting in London that he would go to India to highlight the plight of his people, the struggle of the Baloch people enters a new phase. Prime Minister Modi and his National Security Advisor Ajit Doval have shown pragmatism on many scores while dealing with Pakistan. The Ministry of External Affairs in the present dispensation has taken definite steps towards isolating Pakistan on human rights and Islamabad’s nursery for international terrorism. 

Iran may be wary of supporting the Baloch cause as it has a sizeable Balochi population of its own. India, acting in tandem with Afghanistan, can provide hope. The Red Fort speech of Narendra Modi has set the wheel in motion.

- Advertisement -

Check out our other content

Check out other tags:

Most Popular Articles