Friday, February 1, 2008

Drawn and Quartered

By SELIG S. HARRISON

WHATEVER the outcome of the Pakistani elections, now scheduled for Feb. 18, the existing multiethnic Pakistani state is not likely to survive for long unless it is radically restructured.

Given enough American pressure, a loosely united, confederated Pakistan could still be preserved by reinstating and liberalizing the defunct 1973 Constitution, which has been shelved by successive military rulers. But as matters stand, the Punjabi-dominated regime of Pervez Musharraf is headed for a bloody confrontation with the country’s Pashtun, Baluch and Sindhi minorities that could well lead to the breakup of Pakistan into three sovereign entities.

In that event, the Pashtuns, concentrated in the northwestern tribal areas, would join with their ethnic brethren across the Afghan border (some 40 million of them combined) to form an independent “Pashtunistan.” The Sindhis in the southeast, numbering 23 million, would unite with the six million Baluch tribesmen in the southwest to establish a federation along the Arabian Sea from India to Iran. “Pakistan” would then be a nuclear-armed Punjabi rump state.

In historical context, such a breakup would not be surprising. There had never been a national entity encompassing the areas now constituting Pakistan, an ethnic mélange thrown together hastily by the British for strategic reasons when they partitioned the subcontinent in 1947.

For those of Pashtun, Sindhi and Baluch ethnicity, independence from colonial rule created a bitter paradox. After resisting Punjabi domination for centuries, they found themselves subjected to Punjabi-dominated military regimes that have appropriated many of the natural resources in the minority provinces — particularly the natural gas deposits in the Baluch areas — and siphoned off much of the Indus River’s waters as they flow through the Punjab.

The resulting Punjabi-Pashtun animosity helps explain why the United States is failing to get effective Pakistani cooperation in fighting terrorists. The Pashtuns living along the Afghan border are happy to give sanctuary from Punjabi forces to the Taliban, which is composed primarily of fellow Pashtuns, and to its Qaeda friends.

Pashtun civilian casualties resulting from Pakistani and American air strikes on both sides of the border are breeding a potent underground Pashtun nationalist movement. Its initial objective is to unite all Pashtuns in Pakistan, now divided among political jurisdictions, into a unified province. In time, however, its leaders envisage full nationhood. After all, before the British came, the Pashtuns had been politically united under the banner of an Afghan empire that stretched eastward into the Punjabi heartland.

The Baluch people, for their part, have been waging intermittent insurgencies since their forced incorporation into Pakistan in 1947. In the current warfare Pakistani forces are widely reported to be deploying American-supplied aircraft and intelligence equipment that was intended for use in Afghan border areas. Their victims are forging military links with Sindhi nationalist groups that have been galvanized into action by the death of Benazir Bhutto, a Sindhi hero as was her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

The breakup of Pakistan would be a costly and destabilizing development that can still be avoided, but only if the United States and other foreign donors use their enormous aid leverage to convince Islamabad that it should not only put the 1973 Constitution back into effect, but amend it to go beyond the limited degree of autonomy it envisaged. Eventually, the minorities want a central government that would retain control only over defense, foreign affairs, international trade, communications and currency. It would no longer have the power to oust an elected provincial government, and would have to renegotiate royalties on resources with the provinces.

In the shorter term, the Bush administration should scrap plans to send Special Forces into border areas in pursuit of Al Qaeda, which would only strengthen Islamist links with Pashtun nationalists. It should help secular Pashtun forces to compete with the Islamists by pushing for fair representation of Pashtun areas now barred from political participation.

It is often argued that the United States must stand by Mr. Musharraf and a unitary Pakistani state to safeguard Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. But the nuclear safeguards depend on the Pakistani Army as an institution, not on the president. They would not be affected by a break-up, since the nuclear weapons would remain under the control of the Punjabi rump state and its army.

The Army has built up a far-flung empire of economic enterprises in all parts of Pakistan with assets in the tens of billions, and can best protect its interests by defusing the escalating conflict with the minorities. Similarly, the minorities would profit from cooperative economic relations with the Punjab, and for this reason prefer confederal autonomy to secession. All concerned, including the United States, have a profound stake in stopping the present slide to Balkanization.

Selig S. Harrison is the director of the Asia program at the Center for International Policy and the author of “In Afghanistan’s Shadow,” a study of Baluch nationalism.

Source: New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/opinion/01harrison.html?ref=opinion

Crushing dissent

Peter Tatchell

A former MP and government minister from Pakistan-occupied Baluchistan, Hyrbyair Marri, has been languishing in Belmarsh prison for the last two months. He was arrested at his west London home in early December on charges of plotting terrorist acts abroad (it is assumed in Pakistan). His next pre-trial hearing is today at the central criminal court.

Marri was minister for construction and works in the provincial assembly of Baluchistan from 1997 to 1998.

Baluch leaders and Pakistani opposition figures believe the charges against him are without substance and have condemned Marri's arrest and imprisonment. They claim that the Pakistani dictator, President Pervez Musharraf, has a vendetta against the Marri family, who are leading nationalists in the province of Baluchistan - a formerly independent nation that was invaded and annexed by Pakistan in 1948. They cite leaks that Musharraf has privately vowed to crush the Baluch self-determination movement and destroy its leaders. They also highlight the fact that the Pakistani authorities have been pressing the British government to arrest and extradite Marri and several other Baluch nationalists who live in London.

Their claims seem to have some credibility. Marri's arrest in London two months ago came just two weeks after the Pakistani authorities assassinated his brother, Balaach Marri. His murder was strongly condemned by opposition leaders such as Imran Khan and the late Benazir Bhutto.

Marri's other brother, Mehran Baluch, who also lives in the UK and is the Baluch representative to the UN human rights council, was last year the subject of a top-secret extradition bid by Pakistan, on charges that critics have condemned as trumped up.

The actions of the Musharraf regime against these three brothers look like a systematic attempt to target the family and crush three major voices of Baluch dissent. What is particularly shaming is that the UK government appears to be colluding with this plot by the despots in Islamabad.

Marri's arrest in London also coincided with a major Pakistani military offensive against Baluchistan, which has included the indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas using US-supplied fighter jets and other weapons small arms, some of which may have been supplied by Britain. The Labour government is aiding the Pakistani tyrant; authorising the sale of the military hardware that he uses to sustain his dictatorship and suppress his own people.

Hundreds of innocent Baluch civilians have been killed in Musharraf's scorched-earth military campaign. Thousands more people have been detained without trial or forced to flee their homes to escape Musharraf's terror tactics.

Earlier this week, I spoke to the chair of the human rights commission of Pakistan, Asma Jahangir. She confirmed the apparent attacks on civilian areas; saying she visited the site of a supposed rebel military camp that was blasted to pieces by the Pakistan army and air force. Littering the ground, she said, were domestic artefacts, civilian clothing and children's toys.

Marri has been charged alongside another Baluch human rights activist, Faiz Baluch, of north London.

I know both the detained men. They are Baluchistan nationalists and human rights activists. We worked together to expose Pakistan's persecution of the Baluch people and to support the broader struggle for democracy in Pakistan. The defendants never expressed to me any support or sympathy for terrorism. All our campaigns have been lawful and peaceful. I would be very surprised if either man was involved in any terror plot. Marri is a member of one of the most distinguished and esteemed Baluch families. He is a rather unlikely terrorist.

It is my opinion that these terror charges are likely to have resulted from pressure by the Musharraf regime. We know that Musharraf has been pressing Britain for the extradition of Baluch nationalists exiled in London.

Britain and Pakistan have been in secret negotiations for a prisoner-swap deal. The UK police want to extradite terror suspect Rashid Rauf from Pakistan. They are keen to question him in connection with the 2006 plot to blow up transatlantic airliners.

In exchange for handing over Rauf to the UK, the Pakistani government is demanding the extradition from Britain of Baluch nationalists.

Late last year, however, after the UK government failed to extradite Mehran Baluch, Rauf, a high security prisoner, mysteriously escaped from police custody in Pakistan.

Despite their carelessness, Musharraf's men are still pressing for the Baluch nationalists to be handed over. If Marri and Baluch are extradited, they will never get a fair trial and will face torture, imprisonment and probable execution.

Astonishingly, our government, in our name, is colluding with a bloody dictator like Musharraf. Gordon Brown should refuse to give in to pressure and blackmail by the Pakistani dictatorship. He should publicly reject requests for the arrest and extradition of Baluch leaders and activists, and cease supplying military aid to the tyrant in Islamabad.

Source: Guardian
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/peter_tatchell/2008/02/crushing_dissent.html