ANY move that appears to break the stultifying impasse in Balochistan is cause for at least some cautious optimism. A report in this paper yesterday revealed that the Baloch leader, the Khan of Kalat Mir Suleman Dawood Jan, who lives in self-exile in London, has agreed to meet a delegation of Balochistan government officials. Prior to this, he will hold consultations with members of the Grand Jirga who, after the death of Nawab Akbar Bugti at the hands of the army in 2006, had sent him abroad to work towards the restoration of Kalat State. In September last year, the Balochistan Assembly passed a resolution to approach the tribal leader and enlist his help in establishing peace in the province.

For the National Party-led government that has been vowing to bring the ‘angry Baloch’ to the negotiating table, this is a victory of sorts. Aside from the Khan of Kalat’s lofty standing in Balochistan’s tribal hierarchy, there is the weight of history: in pre-Partition days, the erstwhile princely state — then ruled by the present Khan’s grandfather — held a pre-eminent position in the tribal confederacy that stretched across central and southern Balochistan. The government is obviously hoping that Mir Suleman can bring the other angry Baloch — the recalcitrant separatist leaders — to the negotiating table. However, history also records that when the then Khan of Kalat signed the Instrument of Accession to join Pakistan in 1948, it caused much anguish among nationalist-minded Baloch. His progeny too, not least because of their perceived closeness to the establishment, came to be considered as ‘traitors’ to the Baloch cause as the bitterness exploded into open rebellion several times over subsequent decades. Although Nawab Bugti’s murder was a watershed that led Mir Suleman to break his ties with the state and himself adopt the separatist narrative, his influence on players in the insurgency is debatable. Not least because for the first time, the separatist movement finds widespread support among educated youth, particularly in the non-sardari southern belt where tribal hierarchy does not inspire the same deference.

Nevertheless, this is a much-needed political initiative after a succession of sterile militarised strategies. In this situation, the removal of precious artifacts from the Khan of Kalat’s palace in Kalat town by his son Prince Mohammed, from whom he is estranged, has the potential of scuttling the talks before they even begin. It also gives oxygen to suspicions of state machinations — never far from the surface in Balochistan — in this case to install the son, seen as a pro-establishment figure, as the Khan of Kalat in place of his father. To restore confidence, the government must ensure the artifacts are returned without delay. In Balochistan, with its Gordian knot of complexities resulting from decades of self-defeating policies, even the slightest wrong move could take us back to square one.

Published in Dawn, June 30th, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play