WHOSOEVER fired those rockets at Kohlu on Wednesday most certainly had a news sense. The four missiles caused no damage, but the attack attracted media attention, because it coincided with President Pervez Musharraf’s four-hour visit to that small town in Balochistan. The incident follows several other acts of terrorism in Balochistan and outside, including the car-bombing close to the PPL offices in Karachi on Sept 22, killing nine people. Two phenomena now seem to be running parallel: some ’mega’ projects are underway in Balochistan; at the same time, Baloch restlessness seems to be increasing. Even though the situation is not at all as grim as it was in February this year - when there was an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation between the security forces and some militants in the Sui area - the situation is far from normal politically. An indication of the Baloch view of the situation was the general council meeting of the Pakistan Oppressed Nations’ Movement in Karachi last week. Present there were some leading Baloch figures, including Ataullah Mangal and Mr Mahmood Khan Achakazai. The meeting rejected the Kalabagh dam - even though Balochistan is only marginally affected by it - but the tone and tenor of the meeting showed frustration in a sizable section of Baloch leaders.
The relevant point is why no progress has been made so far on the recommendations made by the Mushahid Hussain committee report. Drafted after consultations with all sections of Baloch leaders, the committee came up with some useful suggestions, including more state funding for the social sector, especially in the Gwadar area, greater safeguards for the Baloch in federal and provincial jobs, and broadening the participation of Baloch people on the boards of governors of oil and gas corporations. The Mushahid committee was concerned largely with the political situation, but the one headed by Senator Wasim Sajjad, which is to look into the constitutional aspect of Balochistan’s grievances, may turn out to be of greater import. This report is eagerly awaited, because the quantum of provincial autonomy has been a major issue with all the three small provinces.
There are basically two facets to the autonomy question: one is the absence of autonomy to the extent that some Baloch leaders want; the other is the infringement of Balochistan’s provincial rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. The latter issue takes the autonomy question out of the confines of Balochistan, because Sindh and the Frontier too have their own view of it. The 1973 Constitution is, of course, federal in character, but in operation Pakistan is a highly centralized state - even when there is a political government. However, when the army is in power - as it is now - the three small provinces feel deprived of even such autonomy as the Constitution guarantees. The feeling is strongest in Balochistan, because it is the country’s biggest province territorially but economically the most backward. It has large reserves of oil, gas, copper, gold and other minerals, besides fisheries, but it feels its own people do not benefit from the exploitation of these resources. These injustices should be rectified - and in a manner that satisfies the Baloch people and gives them a sense of participation in the political process. While the Mushahid committee’s 92-page report containing 17 points should be implemented, one would expect the other committee to come up with its recommendations and throw it open to the public for debate, because changes in provincial autonomy cannot be Balochistan-specific and must relate to all units of the federation.
http://www.dawn.com/2005/12/16/ed.htm#1 |
