The document discusses the rise of Baloch nationalist movement in Pakistan's Balochistan province. It summarizes that Balochistan has seen periods of political uprisings since Pakistan's independence in 1947 as the Baloch people opposed being ruled by the central Pakistani state. The current rebellion began in 2004. It analyzes factors contributing to Baloch nationalism through the lens of various theories, finding that the internal colonialism framework best explains how the Baloch became a marginalized peripheral community and how economic and political suppression fostered nationalist sentiment. Tribal social structures and the role of elite sardars in leading the movement are also examined.

1. Rise of Baloch
Nationalist
Movement
[Balochistan has been a hotbed of
political uprisings since the partition
of the subcontinent in 1947]
Qulb e abbas

2. Balochistan, Pakistan’s least populous and most expansive province is currently
one of the most volatile regions of the country. Over the last 12 months, political
instability has taken a turn for the violent side, claiming many lives and resulting in
significant property damage inside, as well as outside, the province. However, this is not
a new process. Balochistan has been a hotbed of political uprisings since the partition of
the subcontinent in 1947. Ever since, the province has seen five instances of armed
struggle against the Pakistani state, the most significant being the four year long armed
insurgency in the 1970s, and the current rebellion, starting 2004. (Khan, 2005)
While there are a number of factors contributing to the current conflict, the most
important relate to its relationship with the center, and resultantly, the allocation of
resources. However, the articulation of the Baloch people’s demands in a nationalist, or
ethnonationalist, framework has ebbed and risen at different points in the province’s
history. As mentioned earlier, the province has seen five periods of high political activity
that have left their marks on Baloch society and politics. An interesting factor that cannot
be ignored in analyzing the Baloch nationalist movement is the tribal structure of Baloch
society, and as a result, their politics.
This paper aims to investigate the relationship between the Baloch social setup
and Baloch politics, and understanding the rise of Baloch nationalism/ethnonationalism
based on the internal mechanics of Baloch society. We will first understand the concepts
of nationalism, ethnicity and nation by building a theoretical framework for analysis,
followed by a brief history of the Baloch nationalist movement, and finally, an analysis of
2

3. how the Baloch nationalist movement fits into the existing theoretical tools for analysis
available.
Nationalism/Ethnonationalism
The case of nations, and ethnicities, has taken on a lot of importance since the
1970’s. While there were predictions that the newly independent former colonies would
settle their ethnic diversities as industrialization spread, they fell far short of reality as
ethnic conflict erupted in several parts of the world from the 1970’s onwards. (Newman,
1991; 451) Before we can analyze the rise of the Baloch nationalist movement, which
had it’s highest point in terms of political and armed activity for secession in the 1970’s
(Khan, 2005), we need to define the terms involved.
The primary terms that need definition for the sake of our analysis are nation,
nationalism and ethnicity. A nation can be defined as a group of people who imagine
themselves as having a shared culture, heritage and ancestry, according to Benedict
Anderson. It is important to use the word “imagine”, because every individual in a nation
does not know every other individual personally, yet identifies with the similarities on the
basis of imagined bonds. It is also imagined as a “limited” community because logically a
nation cannot include every individual in the world as it would destroy the very purpose
of limiting a group of people within a detached identity. Also, a nation is also one that
aspires to a state, thus Anderson’s inclusion of the “sovereignty” factor in his definition.
(Anderson, 1991; 5-7) That is what seems to differentiate a nation from an ethnic group,
3

4. in that an ethnic group may also be a community that involves a shared culture and
heritage etc, however a nation is one that aspires to a territorial stretch, and is a
“political” community, as stated by Benedict Anderson, or as having “unmistakably
acquired a strong association with the state” as described by Fenton (2004).
This brings us to nationalism, which is the most important concept to understand,
as Hobsbawn states: “Nations do not make states and nationalisms but the other way
round.” (1990; 10) This is also why Hobsbawm considers the nation to be a modern
concept of political and cultural organization (1990). We will see how this statement is
relevant, and indeed critical, in understanding the several factors that contribute to the
rise of nationalism in general, and Baloch nationalism in particular. There are several
different theories on nationalism presented in the literature reviewed for this paper. They
vary from liberalism to Marxism to the Weberian concepts of the state and the nation. We
will take a brief look at these theories before proceeding to apply them to the Baloch
nationalist movement.
Liberal concepts of nationalism lead on from the work of Kant, applying self-
determination concepts for the individuals to nations, who also have self-determination
rights. This treatment of the nation as an individual is also seen in the work of Mill.
(Spencer and Wollman, 2002; 6-7) Marxism on the other hand, based on the work of
Marx and Engels, considers nationalism to be a flawed understanding of the organization
within society. They considered societies to be split along lines of class, not along lines
of national or cultural differences. Max Weber applies his understanding of nationalism
4

5. in a way similar to Benedict Anderson, in saying that “people come to see themselves as
belonging together – coming from a common background – as a consequence of acting
together”. (Spencer and Wollman, 2002; 23) This also relates to Hobsbawm’s theory
about how nationalist political activity breeds national identity in that seemingly opposite
direction. There are also strong propositions that modernization of social setups coincides
with the rise of nationalism, with an elite class, be it the ruling autocrats or the
bourgeoisie, dictating the terms on which a national identity is to be constructed and
employed for political action. (Spencer and Wollman, 2002; 26-50)
The Baloch
Before we move on to understanding the rise of Baloch nationalism in light of the
theoretical work discussed, let us first take a look at the nature of the Baloch people
themselves, their social and economic organization.
The Baloch people trace their origins back to the Middle East. Historical evidence
also suggests that they initially inhabited the area that is now Syria, migrated east through
Persia (Sistan, to be precise) and then into the current Balochistan provinces of Iran and
Pakistan, as well as the southern part of Afghanistan. (Harrison, 1981; 10-11)
The Baloch lifestyle is predominantly nomadic. The Baloch terrain is very harsh and is
not very hospitable to agriculture for the most part, as a result, cattle rearing and pastoral
subsistence agriculture is practiced by the nomadic tribes. Though certain changes have
5

6. been taking place as far as some (very limited) urbanization and modernization are
concerned, however, as far as the scope of this paper is concerned i.e. the rise of Baloch
nationalism, we will consider Balochistan to be a predominantly subsistence based
economy. (Scholz, 2002; 4-5)
The Baloch political setup is directly related to the abovementioned economic and
geographical conditions:
Two primary forms of social structure and leadership which continue to inform politics in
Balochistan can be glossed as ‘tribalism’ and ‘feudalism’. Typified by the Bugti…the tribal
model is based on the tracing of common ancestry and the use of the lineage principle for
recruitment, but is importantly supplemented by political contracts between leaders and
followers, culminating in the office of sardar. (Titus ed., 1996; xvii-xix)
It is this system that presents the interesting point of analysis for us in this paper.
Rise of Baloch Nationalism
Before the creation of Pakistan, the Baloch enjoyed a treaty status with Britain, which
otherwise, had almost complete control of the Indian sub-continent. Though the British
had attempted unsuccessfully to invade the Afghan area, they felt that the Baloch were
not worth the trouble and offered them a treaty status. Previous to the British domination
of India, the Baloch remained autonomous, with local political structures taking
precedence over any regional power that may have been present, be it the Persians or the
British. (Harrison, 1981; 22-26)
6

7. When the partition of the subcontinent loomed large, the Baloch leadership was very
clear about the future of Balochistan. Balochistan was seen as an independent state of the
Baloch people, without any other state swallowing it up. They were reading to have
close ties with Pakistan regarding matters of defence and foreign policy, however,
without any compromise over However, in 1947, the Khan of Kalat (the ruler under
which all the tribes of Balochistan organized themselves) came under a lot of pressure to
accede to Pakistan. An independent Balochistan was unacceptable to the new Pakistani
leadership. The Khan, however, did not see Balochistan as a part of Pakistan and declared
independence. This prompted the Pakistani state to send in the armed forces to pressure
the Khan into acceding, which he did. From this point onwards, the Baloch have been in
a constant tug of war with the Pakistani state, sometimes for autonomy, sometimes for
independence, or sometimes merely for their fair share in the resources of the country.
(Harrison, 1981; 22-26)
Now that we have a theoretical background on nationalism, as well as a historical
background of the Baloch and the preamble to their nationalist movement, let us analyze
the different factors that played a role in the rise of the Baloch nationalist movement, and
their relationship with the theoretical framework that we established earlier.
The most important anomaly that arises from analyzing Baloch society is that it did not
have any rapid industrialization or modernization occurring when the nationalist
movement first gained force in the late 1940’s. From the earlier literature reviewed, some
theorists such as Gellner have attributed the rise of nationalism with the rise of the
7

8. modern industrial society with a rising workforce and middle class. However, we do not
find such similarities with the Baloch society/economy. In fact, as mentioned earlier, the
feudal/tribal socio-political structure was extremely powerful in this region, which stood
on a subsistence pastoral agricultural system. Therefore no modernization of the economy
or society was present for Gellner’s modernization perspective to apply.
However, Gellner makes an important point while theorizing nationalism and the causes
of its rise. He defines a nationalist movement as one which is called into action because
the political congruency of the nation and the territory is challenged. This violation,
according to Gellner takes place in two primary ways: first, “the political boundary can
fail to include all the members of the appropriate nation”; and second, the ruling power is
external to the people inhabiting the land. (Gellner, 1983; 1)
With Balochistan, we see a manifestation of both these violations, thus linking Gellner’s
violation principles theory to the actuality of the Balochistan situation. Firstly,
Balochistan was effectively annexed by the Pakistani state, an entity that the Baloch
leadership considered external from the beginning, and they did not buy into the principle
of acceding to Pakistani simply on the basis of religion. (Harrison, 1981; 25) As far as
Gellner’s second violation is concerned, it is more of an implicit application. The
Pakistan state was Punjabi and Muhajir dominated at the time and therefore the feeling of
external rule was immense within the leadership of the Baloch people. (Harrison, 1981;
24-26)
8

9. Michael Hechter’s work is particularly relevant to the Balochistan nationalist movement.
Hechter does not put his own theory forward, but instead uses Lenin and Gramsci’s work
and explores it further in the “internal colonialists” framework. Hechter discusses the
formation of central/core and peripheral communities in the early stages of nation/state-
building and states how that early period of economic and political modernization can
lead to the core communities/ethnic groups doing their best to maintain their position of
power. (Birch, 1978; 326-327) In Pakistan and Balochistan’s case, the Punjabi/Muhajir
dominated state apparatus was being used to the fullest in suppressing any internal
diversity and a “Pakistani” identity was being promoted as the only option. Thus the
Balochis became the peripheral community within their own lands as far as political clout
at the center was concerned. This again correlates with the Gellnerian framework of
violations discussed earlier.
The role of the elites cannot be ignored either. As mentioned in the theoretical brief
earlier, the skepticism of the Marxist school of thought regarding the use of nationalism
as a tool for perpetuating the hegemony of the ruling classes is true in the sense that it is
always the economic/political/intellectual elite of any particular community that will not
only promote, but even define, the demands and grievances of their people. As far as
Balochistan is concerned, that is true with the Sardars. The majority of the Baloch
leadership is with the sardars of the tribes, with leaders like Ataullah Mengal, Ghaus Bux
Bizenjo (not a sardar, but a very significant tribal power holder nonetheless) and Akbar
Bugti playing a huge role in defining and leading Baloch nationalist politics from the
very beginning. (Harrison, 1981; 32-69) (Rehman, 2005)
9

10. The internal colonialist school of thought, however, becomes the most applicable of all
the theories available as far as Baloch nationalism is concerned when we look at the
economic and political marginalization of the Balochis that took place in the 50’s and
60’s. As mentioned earlier, nationalist sentiment is bred and fostered by a sense of
suppression and deprivation by the core community of the peripheral communities.
During Ayub Khan’s rule, Pakistan underwent its most rapid industrialization period. The
effects were significant in the core regions, however, Balochistan supplied a major
industrial energy resource, i.e. natural gas, yet saw no fruits of Pakistan’s
industrialization. The initial feeling of distrust and animosity towards the core was
exacerbated by this development in the 1960’s. However, the economic marginalization
was not the end of things. The internal colonialist theory presents us with a further
application when we consider the political suppression of the Baloch that took place in
the early 1970’s. An elected government was dismissed by the federal government of
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, which was perceived as an attack on the political rights and the
political leadership of the province. This sparked the most violent armed struggle by the
Baloch against the center that was sustained for about four years. (Harrison, 1981; 27-35)
As mentioned earlier in the theoretical discussion, nationalism to a large extent, as stated
by Anderson, is dependent on the people of a nation actually considering or imagining
themselves as a part of that nation. The role of myth, descent and folklore has a huge role
to play in this regard. Baloch nationalists, through literature and speeches, promoted this
idea of primodialism and primacy of the Baloch identity and tried to build momentum
based on this newly strengthened identity. (Titus ed.,1996; xix-xxi)
10

11. Conclusion
While there is a plethora of theoretical work regarding nationalism, from the review
presented in this paper and the subsequent application to the Baloch nationalist
movement, it is evident that so far, there is no single model that explains fully the factors
involved in the rise of nationalist movements. While one theory may be applied to a
greater degree than another, a specific model is required for every movement to fully
understand its dynamics. Balochistan is a similar case. As discussed earlier, the mixture
of a tribal social setup, with comparatively premodern political and economic structures,
does not fall into the rather linear modernization and nationalist development paradigm
put forth. However, it does fall into the theories which regard the marginalization of
communities as a primary motivational and mobilization factor in nationalist movements.
11