By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: The tribal insurgency in Balochistan has become a ?omajor headache? for the Musharraf government, according to a report circulated on Monday by the World Socialist Web, an online news and opinion service.
Government officials estimate the economic losses suffered as a result of the attack on Sui gas installations by insurgents at between Rs 150 and 200 million per day, or $2.5 to $3.3 million. Some 20,000 security troops, including 5,000 armed forces personnel, have reportedly been redeployed to Balochistan. ?oBut thus far the military and the pro-military government ? have energetically denied they that are planning a major military operation. Islamabad has appealed for negotiations, saying it is ready to heed calls for Balochistan to receive a greater share of gas royalties and federal government development funds,? says the report.
The report points out that the parliamentary opposition; the MQM and much of the press have spoken out against using violence to resolve the crisis in Balochistan. From within Pakistan?Ts political establishment there have been numerous warnings that the Musharraf regime, by further centralising power in the hands of a ?oPunjabi-dominated? military and bureaucracy, has exacerbated national-ethnic tensions, with potentially grave consequences for the unity and integrity of the state. The anti-government movement in Balochistan is led by tribal chiefs who resent the decline in their power and privileges that has accompanied economic development and the migration of Afghan refugees and other Pakistanis into the province over the past quarter century. But the insurgency has tapped into genuine and deep-rooted popular resentments concerning the lack of economic opportunities and democracy, says the report.
According to the analysis, while the Balochi agitation has dominated newspaper headlines in Pakistan for much of the past month, it is just one of a myriad of problems and stresses facing the Musharraf regime and Pakistan?Ts ruling elite. Under a series of geopolitical and economic compulsions, Musharraf is being forced to pursue foreign and domestic policies that are highly unpopular with the broad mass of Pakistan?Ts toilers, but that also cut across the interests and aspirations of important sections of the elite and their traditional supports, from the Muslim religious leadership to the military-intelligence establishment.
The report takes the view that Washington?Ts pledge of a long-term relationship with Pakistan is at least partly a response to criticisms from the Pakistani elite that during the Cold War Washington repeatedly promoted Pakistan as a frontline state, only to give it short-shrift when US geo-political strategy shifted. Islamabad, it points out, has obtained several billion dollars in US aid, the rescheduling of much of its debt, and approval for purchases of advanced military equipment from US arms-makers, since Musharraf ceded to Washington?Ts September 2001 demands. ?oBut if the Bush administration is, next only to the Pakistani military, the strongest bulwark of Musharraf, its aggressive, neo-colonial thrust into the Middle East and Central Asia is also enormously destabilising to his regime,? it adds.
The report says there is ?ogreat popular hostility? to the Bush administration, especially for its? illegal conquest? of Iraq. The recent report that Pakistan has been providing assistance to the US in planning military action against Iran can only further fuel the perception that Islamabad is ?oan accomplice in the crimes of US imperialism?. It could also open Pakistan to retaliation from Teheran and further complicate relations with India, which in pursuit of energy sources and out of concern over the US invasion of Afghanistan is actively pursuing closer relations with Iran. Some Pakistani officials have hinted at the involvement of Iran, without naming it, in the Balochi crisis. However, Islamabad has been ?odesperately trying to reassure Iran of its friendly intentions?. It has ?ovehemently? denied the recent Seymour Hersch report in the New Yorker.
The India-Pakistan peace process, says the report, has ?ostalled?. While eager to develop trade and other ties with Pakistan, India is adamant that any settlement does not involve a change to the current border in Kashmir. Meanwhile, a serious conflict has developed between India and Pakistan over their interpretation of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, with Islamabad claiming that the Baglihar dam, now under construction in India, is illegal. It has appealed to the World Bank to mediate, but the bank is wary of getting involved in what one official described as a ?oPandora?Ts Box?.
According to the analysis, ?oWhile the Indo-Pakistan peace parlays have proven extremely popular in Pakistan, as in India, the Pakistani elite has for decades presented the unification of Kashmir under Pakistani-rule as a holy cause, whipping up anti-Indian sentiment in the name of Kashmir as a means to divert social tensions and promote national unity. Moreover, the Indo-Pakistani conflict and the claim of an imminent threat to Pakistan?Ts national existence have been central to the military?Ts assertion that it must play a major role in government.?
On the economic front, the news is not as good as the government says it is, says the report. Pakistan?Ts growth rate improved to 6 percent last year, but it is receiving only a small fraction of the world?Ts foreign investment (only $328 million in 2004). Inflation rose sharply in the second half of 2004 to reach an annual rate of 9 percent. Recent years have seen a sharp increase in poverty and social polarisation, with somewhere between 35 and 39 percent of the population now living under the poverty line. By pouring money into large infrastructure projects, the government is ignoring social needs. Some of the dams the state wants built will result in large numbers of peasants losing their lands. They have also become a flashpoint for grievances and resentments among different provincially based elites over the allocation of resources.
As for politics, ?oMusharraf well recognises that he needs to shore up support for his regime from within the political elite, whom he shunted aside on seizing power, if he is to withstand the opposition to his embrace of Washington, be in a position to effect a strategic shift in Pakistan?Ts relations with arch-rival India, and press forward with his socially destructive neo-liberal, export-led growth strategy.?
There has been talk of a ?onational reconciliation? but Musharraf apparently fears that Benazir Bhutto?Ts popular appeal far surpasses his own. ?oMusharraf?Ts fears of the political and social conflict that might erupt if there is any loosening up of the restrictions on political activity were well-illustrated in two recent comments. According to PML President Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, the president has told him that he wants ?~the ruling party and the opposition to have identical views on Kashmir, Iraq, Afghanistan and other important issues?T.?
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_1-2-2005_pg7_32 |
