8 hours Ago
Until Islamabad abandons its coercive policies in favour of an inclusive and equitable political framework, no amount of rhetorical diversion or external blame-shifting will bring any semblance of stability to the region Pakistan is frequently the subject of international scrutiny, typically due to adverse circumstances, with terrorism being the most prominent concern. On 11 March 2025, the country experienced one of its most severe insurgent assaults in recent history, as Baloch separatists intercepted, attacked, and seized control of a passenger train travelling through the remote Bolan region of Balochistan. This act endangered over 450 passengers, the majority of whom were off-duty military personnel and their families, highlighting both the growing sophistication of insurgent operations and the persistent deficiencies within Pakistan’s security framework.
According to reports, on 11 March, the Jaffar Express, travelling from Quetta, the provincial capital of Balochistan, to Peshawar in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, was ambushed by militants of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) as it emerged from the Mashkaf Tunnel in the isolated Bolan region of the province. In a premeditated action, BLA militants divided the passengers, allowing women, children, and the elderly to pass unharmed while taking off-duty Pakistani soldiers hostage. Despite the seriousness of the situation, the Pakistan Army demonstrated a delayed response, taking several hours before commencing military operations that lasted overnight.
In its official statement, the military reported the neutralisation of 33 insurgents, while attributing the deaths of 21 hostages to the separatist group. However, contradicting the official narrative, the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), which demanded the release of their imprisoned members and Baloch political prisoners, claimed responsibility for the execution of 50 captives, directly challenging the state’s account. In a written statement to the London-based Guardian newspaper, the BLA characterised the attack as “a direct response to Pakistan’s prolonged colonial occupation of Balochistan and the ongoing war crimes against the Baloch people".
The statement further asserted that the operation aimed to dismantle the myth of the Pakistan Army’s perceived invincibility, declaring that the military’s “continued presence in Balochistan will face resolute resistance". The incident serves as yet another indictment of the Pakistan Army’s persistent inability to quell the province’s ongoing unrest—a reflection of both its strategic ineffectiveness and the growing divide between the state and the peripheries it aims to control. Yet, in a predictable attempt at deflection, the Pakistani establishment has swiftly reverted to its usual tactic of external scapegoating, attributing blame to India and Afghanistan in an effort to divert attention from its own catastrophic security failings.
This narrative, though frequently used to conceal the state’s institutional shortcomings, does little to conceal the harsh reality: an insurgency emboldened, a province in crisis, and a nation increasingly entangled in the repercussions of its own strategic short-sightedness. Balochistan has endured prolonged cycles of insurgent violence for decades, with the current phase representing the fourth—and longest—since its controversial and forced integration into the Pakistani state in 1948. From the outset, the region has faced persistent political and economic marginalisation by the Punjabi-dominated establishment, which has systematically impeded any meaningful local political autonomy.
The state has consistently bypassed indigenous consensus, instead imposing its own dominant authority through compliant provincial administrations—most notably represented by the current regime of Sarfaraz Bugti. Despite his Baloch heritage, Bugti operates as little more than a tool of the military establishment, carrying out its directives with blatant disregard for the aspirations and grievances of the local population. At the same time, the region’s most prominent political figures, such as Akhtar Mengal, face relentless humiliation and systematic political marginalisation.
Mengal, for example, was forced to resign from Pakistan’s National Assembly last year after being repeatedly denied the opportunity to raise the region’s grievances, even within the so-called highest parliamentary institution of the country. This deliberate silencing of Baloch voices extends beyond the political elite to the systematic repression of grassroots movements advocating for non-violent resistance. One such organisation, the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC), led by Dr.
Mahrang Baloch, recently nominated for the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, has been at the forefront of demanding an end to Islamabad’s militarised control over Balochistan. The BYC has strongly opposed the Pakistan Army’s entrenched regime of repression, including its most severe human rights violations, such as the widespread practice of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions of Baloch youth, and sexual violence against women, among others. Yet, rather than responding to these calls for justice, the state has intensified its coercive tactics, ensuring that even the most peaceful forms of resistance are met with systematic intimidation, persecution, and suppression.
Furthermore, successive governments, operating under the dominance of the military intelligence apparatus, have sustained a colonial model in Balochistan, characterised by resource extraction and systemic dispossession. The province’s abundant natural resources have been ruthlessly exploited to support economic growth in Punjab, while Balochistan itself remains trapped in a state of intentional underdevelopment. Consequently, deprived of fair access to the nation’s economic benefits, the region suffers from some of the most severe socio-economic conditions, not only in Pakistan but also among the lowest globally.
It is this deeply entrenched colonial subjugation of Balochistan that has transformed its political and socio-economic grievances into armed resistance, exemplified by groups such as the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), the most prominent insurgent group in the province. Notably, the BLA, which advocates for secession from Pakistan, emerged in the early 2000s under the leadership of Balach Marri, son of the veteran Baloch nationalist leader Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri. The group quickly gained prominence, a process facilitated by the Pakistani establishment’s systematic dismantling of channels for civil and political dissent.
The state’s unrelenting suppression of legitimate political discourse left few alternatives, even for those once aligned with the establishment, forcing former moderates to turn to insurgency as a final recourse. As Adil Raja, a former military officer now in self-imposed exile for exposing the Pakistan Army’s mistakes, asserts , “It is a difficult path to become an insurgent and be labelled a terrorist. The question is, why would they still choose this route? The answer lies in decades of brutal suppression by the Punjab-centric military policies that dominate Pakistan.
" A prime example of this political repression was the defection of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, the leader of the Bugti clan, a seasoned parliamentarian, and a statesman who had served as Pakistan’s federal minister, as well as the governor and chief minister of Balochistan. A staunch advocate for Baloch rights, Bugti found himself increasingly isolated by the state’s inflexibility, its ongoing expropriation of Balochistan’s considerable natural resources, and its refusal to grant even basic civil liberties to the region. Confronted with an unyielding military regime, he took up arms in 2004 in defence of his people, though his defiance was met with brutal retaliation.
In 2006, the Pakistani military, under President General Pervez Musharraf, who also served as Army chief, launched a merciless assault, killing Bugti and dozens of his young Baloch fighters by detonating a mountain cave on the outskirts of his hometown, Dera Bugti. His assassination, far from quelling the flames of Baloch resistance, cemented his status as a martyr and has since acted as a catalyst for the intensification of the insurgency, further widening the rift between Balochistan and the Pakistani state. Instead of addressing the deeply rooted socio-economic and political grievances of the Baloch population, the Pakistani establishment has entrenched itself in a narrow, two-pronged militaristic approach, completely lacking any meaningful political engagement or efforts at reconciliation.
On one front, the Pakistan Army continues to escalate its harsh military operations, committing serious human rights violations with impunity. The state is accused of establishing a regime of terror in Balochistan, marked by the enforced disappearances of Baloch youth, extrajudicial killings, and the systematic use of sexual violence as a tool of coercion—practices that reflect a colonial security apparatus treating the region as an occupied periphery rather than a vital part of the nation. At the same time, Islamabad maintains a familiar narrative of external interference, conveniently attributing the insurgency to supposed foreign backing, particularly by India.
This rhetorical device functions as little more than a diversionary tactic, an attempt to obscure the state’s own structural violence and institutionalised repression in Balochistan. By externalising the conflict, the establishment absolves itself of responsibility, evading the core truth that its own exploitative policies and militarised governance are the primary drivers of the region’s persistent unrest. Notably, even within its well-rehearsed narrative of externalisation, the Pakistan Army selectively attributes blame to rival states such as India, while deliberately overlooking actors like Iran.
Despite Iran’s historical involvement as a logistical supporter of various Baloch factions operating across the border, using its geographical proximity to advance its broader geopolitical rivalry with Pakistan, Islamabad remains notably silent about Tehran’s role. This selective attribution underscores Pakistan’s calculated approach to external scapegoating, where accusations are shaped not by empirical evidence but by strategic priorities and evolving diplomatic needs. Furthermore, this tendency reflects the Pakistani state’s long-standing practice of instrumentalising India’s name for domestic propaganda, making it a convenient scapegoat for the country’s numerous internal shortcomings.
By continually attributing its security crises to New Delhi, Islamabad avoids the need for self-reflection, refusing to recognise the structural factors driving the ongoing violence in Balochistan, chief among them being its own colonial-style domination of the region. At the same time, this narrative distortion highlights Pakistan’s strategic ineffectiveness, as it lacks both the political will and the geopolitical influence to address the actors that have historically played a significant role in supporting Baloch insurgent groups. Nonetheless, the scale of the Jaffar Express attack should act as a wake-up call for Pakistan’s Punjabi-dominated establishment, as this is neither an isolated event nor an anomaly.
It is merely a precursor to further instability if the state continues with its short-sighted approach. Therefore, rather than relying on its obsolete tactic of external scapegoating to mask its own shortcomings, Islamabad must face the harsh realities on the ground and reassess its policy towards Balochistan. This requires a fundamental shift in approach, one grounded in genuine political reconciliation, economic and social justice, and a clear departure from the entrenched militaristic model.
The state’s ongoing conflict with the Baloch people, characterised by systemic repression and severe human rights violations, will only widen the gulf of discontent. Until Islamabad abandons its coercive policies in favour of an inclusive and equitable political framework, no amount of rhetorical diversion or external blame-shifting will bring any semblance of stability to the region. The writer is an author and columnist and has written several books.
His X handle is @ArunAnandLive. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.
.
