By Kunwar Idris
THE grievance of Sindh and Balochistan against Punjab and the army (both are viewed as one and the same) for their stranglehold on political power and natural resources is as old as Pakistan itself. The discontent, never far from the surface, at intervals erupts into a loud protest emanating from Sindh and a low-level insurgency in Balochistan as is the case now.
The grievance is nurtured and expression given to it by the sardars, or tribal chieftains in Balochistan, and in Sindh by the youth, writers and lawyers. Mumtaz Bhutto, perhaps, is the only sardar among them. Quite understandably, then, the thrust of the struggle in Balochistan is on political power but on economic rights in Sindh.
In Balochistan, the most influential among the sardars and their tribes (Marri, Bugti, Mengal and Achakzai Pathan) have little say in the administration of the province. The governor doesn’t belong to the province (in the other three provinces they do) and the chief minister, too, belongs to a subsidiary tribe. In Sindh, the primary concern is about the lands being grabbed and industry and business being dominated by people who are not sons of the soil or even permanent inhabitants of the province.
The causes of discontentment and its intensity may vary but, assuredly, they reinforce the cultural and lingual affinities that already exist between the people of the two provinces. Only their leaders, because of their diverse backgrounds, interests and aims have not been able to harness it to their common advantage.
In dealing with the occasional outbursts of violence or sabotage in Balochistan, the federal authority, or the Punjabi-army juggernaut as the sardars and nationalists call it, has to rely entirely on the paramilitary forces or on the military itself. The elements opposed to the sardars are too weak to rally round and help the government and the clerics wield no influence on the fiercely secular tribes. Such has been the strategy in the past and it is no different this time round. In fact, the reliance on the use of force is increasing as the authority of the political agent and his levies is on the wane.
The sardars may have been sidelined politically but their hold on the tribes remains intact. They may not be doing much for the welfare of their isolated, primitive folks but government officials do even less while extorting more. That is why the sardars last and rule. The brief army forays or long-lasting garrisons, thus, have not made much of a dent in the tribal structure nor impaired the authority of the sardar, although when the troops camp in his area he himself might be camping in Karachi or in London.
In Sindh, on the other hand, hardly ever is the use of force necessary to deal with nationalists whose protest seldom goes beyond fiery rhetoric. They do not have the leisure, money or armed retinues of the Baloch sardars. Most among them are always able to reconcile their nationalist fervour with a role in the government. They might be ardent nationalists but suffer no qualms of conscience when working as ministers in a highly centralized system.
If insurgency in Balochistan is a recurring phenomenon which can be easily quelled and if Sindhi nationalists are generally peaceable in pursuing their agenda, why put this issue under the spotlight now? There have been some recent developments which should induce Punjab, the army and indeed all mainstream forces of the country to sit up and take notice.
After a long and frustrating effort, Mumtaz Bhutto seems to be succeeding in bringing Sindh’s well-known nationalist thinkers, and rabble-rousers on to one platform under the name of the Sindh Qaumi Ittehad. The sardars and other nationalists of Balochistan, too, are engaged in a similar enterprise. The nationalists of the two provinces plan to forge a united front. Time and emerging issues are on their side.
The nationalists should not be treated as mavericks or secessionists but as exponents of regional identity, rights and powers. Their demand for a confederation or restricting the centre to three or four subjects may be on the extreme but in the present situation the provincial governments are no more than field offices of the federal authority and that is also wholly untenable.
The situation calls for a compromise. But a stray remark recently made by the president that opposing the army amounts to opposing democracy is an invitation to confrontation. No less confrontational is a statement by Makhdum Amin Fahim that if the Kalabagh dam is built the smaller provinces would secede from the federation.
When a cool-headed and committed Pakistani like Makhdum Amin Fahim is driven to talk of secession, Punjab and the army should not remain indifferent. He may be reacting to frequent and insulting insinuations made by some ministers against those who oppose the dam but his statement mirrors the dissatisfaction of the intelligentsia and also of the common people with the legal and administrative position of Sindh in the present federal arrangement. The provincial leaders, indeed, feel insulted when Information Minister Sheikh Rashid challenges them (the source of his confidence should be in no doubt) that "we" will build not one but three dams on the Indus. And another minister, Sher Afghan, tells them that it is not the people but the big landlords of Sindh who are against the dam because the surplus water flowing down the Indus irrigates their illegally occupied (kutcha) lands in the riverine tract. Both ministers seem to be unaware of the depth of public feeling against the dam or are insensitive to it. If they are not perturbed by what Makhdum Amin Fahim says they should ask Illahi Buksh Soomro or any other Sindhi considered more moderate than him that they may know of.
Similar ministerial disdain marks the attitude of the federation when Balochistan asks for greater say in control over its natural gas and coastal waters. It hardly has any other resource. Defiance is in the blood and in the bones of the Baloch and nationhood is still a dream with them but the battle hardened sardars are getting weary. One of them, Ataullah Mengal, said in private the other day that they do not want to leave the federation but are being pushed out of it.
The president and his men might still insist that reason is on their side. But has reason alone ever held a country together? We ourselves reasoned with the Bengalis for 24 years but never spared a moment for their sentiments.
http://www.dawn.com/2005/12/18/op.htm#2 |
