Thread: “The Balochistan situation has some similarity to 1971” —Sardar Sherbaz Khan Mazari,

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

HARDtalk: “The Balochistan situation has some similarity to 1971” —Sardar Sherbaz Khan Mazari, Baloch leader

* The situation in Balochistan has been further aggravated by the government
* Pervez Musharraf has caused the sardars to flare up... he’s so arrogant
* He has not just antagonised the people but even the senior army hierarchy, the retired ones, who consider him an upstart
* Why wasn’t army action initiated when General Musharraf was attacked in Rawalpindi
* The army is involved in Balochistan
* Even in those days we didn’t accept Bhutto’s constitution [1973 constitution]
* The centre should retain defence, foreign affairs and currency, and to some extent, communications
* There are no fanatical Muslims in Balochistan

Not only has Sardar Sherbaz Mazari successfully maintained one of the most impressive personal libraries in the country at his DHA residence (there are 12,000 books), he also remains an avid reader of books, newspapers and magazines his failing health notwithstanding. He has been suffering from heart and back problems for quite some time. Mr Mazari, who is from the Baloch-dominated southern Punjab, entered politics in 1964 when he supported Fatima Jinnah against Ayub Khan in the presidential elections of that year. He was elected to the National Assembly in 1970. A “moderate” politician, he retired from active politics in 1988. However he is willing to play a role in restoring normalcy in Balochistan. Excerpts of his interview with Sarfaraz Ahmed follow:

Daily Times: How do you view the present Balochistan situation?

Sardar Sherbaz Khan Mazari: The situation in Balochistan has been further aggravated by the government.

DT: Do you think that Nawab Bugti in particular has been provoked by the government?

SSKM: Yes. They have been threatening him. [President Pervez] Musharraf has been threatening him with “I will fix you”. Balochistan has already suffered so much. They are killing women and children. It’s disgusting. Such things drive people towards the sardars. I am not pro-sardar; I left my area in disgust [for sardari system]. I am known as a rebel. The sardari system has its good and bad points. But I will not approve of what is happening now.

DT: Last year the government had sought your help for a solution to the problem.

SSKM: After the March killings in Dera Bugti, Chaudhry Shujaat and Mushahid Hussain came over and said, “Sort it out”. I told them I would do my best for the innocent people of Balochistan. And things were settling down.

DT: Has the government approached you again?

SSKM: No. They haven’t. They’re too ‘important’. Shujaat and Mushahid approached me last time, but not this time.

DT: So what did you do for them when they contacted you last time?

SSKM: They wanted a rapprochement. I contacted Nawab Bugti; we were at school together and I know him well. He was very positive and said “Yes, I will do whatever I can”. I also found Shujaat and Mushahid helpful. Now the atmosphere has been polluted by threats...

DT: So your intervention worked last time?

SSKM: Yes it did work. Attaullah Mengal came in; the US ambassador also had lunch with Attaullah and myself. Once in a while the Americans do contact me.

DT: Why have things flared up suddenly?

SSKM: Provocation from the government.

DT: Are you sure?

SSKM: Of course. I am deeply worried myself. My granddaughter is married to Akbar Bugti’s grandson, who will be sardar of the Bugti tribe in the future. The other day I tried to get through to Akbar but suddenly I heard a strange voice saying “Koi baat nahi kar sakta” and the line dropped. I protested, but the voice insisted that I couldn’t talk.

DT: What has caused the three sardars to flare up?

SSKM: Pervez Musharraf. You know the way he talks... He’s so arrogant. That’s not acceptable. He’s saying that “it’s not the 1970s” and that “if they do anything I will hit them so hard they won’t know what hit them”. He’s taken the responsibility of running the country. He needs to mellow down. He has not just antagonised the people but even the senior army hierarchy, the retired ones, who consider him an upstart. They don’t like him. I can give you their names...

DT: Don’t you think that the rocket attack during his Kohlu visit and the firing on the FC IG’s helicopter have perhaps forced the government to get tough with those responsible for terrorist activities in Balochistan?

SSKM: Musharraf has been doing it from the very beginning. It is not something he has done just now. There was no rocket attack on him last year. But look what happened in Dera Bugti. Nawab Bugti has raised a very pertinent point. He wants to know why army action was not initiated when General Musharraf was attacked in Rawalpindi.

I met Musharraf at Abdul Qadir Jaffar’s house at dinner before he took over. Later on we had a meeting in Sindh Club. In the beginning, I liked him. He seemed a frank, open person. I found him nice. But I don’t know what has happened to him now.

DT: The government says that only the Frontier Corps is being used for the present operation in Balochistan.

SSKM: That is not true. The army is involved because they are running the country.

DT: Is it possible to draw parallels between the 1970s’ army action and the present one?

SSKM: In the 1970s, it was more personal. ZA Bhutto couldn’t tolerate anyone disagreeing with him. This [present crackdown in Balochistan] didn’t start on a personal basis, but is fast turning into a personal showdown because of the way General Musharraf keeps referring to these people. He should be a little more understanding. He’s antagonising the people.

I am not well. I hardly go out. But I know that there’s a lot of disillusionment. People from Balochistan do meet me. I met Nawab Khair Bux Marri about six months ago.

DT: Mr Bhutto had certain reasons for initiating action in Balochistan. He issued a White Paper on Balochistan.

SSMK: It was a document meant to mislead rather than provide accurate or unbiased information. It claimed that the situation in Balochistan was normal, which I knew to be a fallacy. Further, it announced that the army force would be withdrawn — an exercise in mendacity. The army eventually left well after Bhutto’s overthrow.

DT: During that period you were accused by your friends like Maulana Noorani of selling out and joining hands with the government.

SSMK: I had decided to take a break from political activity. A parliamentary delegation was going to Australia and New Zealand and I was invited to be its deputy leader. While I declined the position, I decided that since it was a parliamentary delegation and had no official connection with the government, there would be no harm in participating in it as a representative of the opposition. Though I had the permission of the opposition leaders, my decision was criticised by some.

DT: Why didn’t Mr Bhutto imprison you when all the top Baloch and Pushtoon leaders were behind bars?

SSMK: I was an independent member of the National Assembly. I didn’t belong to NAP.

DT: But you were also advocating the “Baloch cause” and seeking the release of the jailed politicians? Was Mr Bhutto your friend?

SSMK: I did all that as a democrat. I don’t think Bhutto was a friend of anyone.

DT: But there was a perception that you were “Islamabad’s man”.

SSMK: It’s baseless. I was more amenable, let’s say. I was more open-minded than others.

DT: You aligned yourself with Asghar Khan when he was considered the “army’s man”.

SSMK: I have known Asghar Khan for many years. He’s very upright and honest. I think, like myself, he failed in politics because of this.

DT: The government accuses Nawab Bugti of blackmailing governments on the issue of gas and it holds Nawab Marri responsible for preventing development in his area, Kohlu, which is reportedly rich in mineral wealth. How do you view these allegations? Don’t you think the government has some plausible reasons for cracking down on those challenging the writ of the state?

SSKM: The government wants the people to be subservient to it. We can’t do that.

DT: What do you say to the allegations of some tribesmen who claim to have been a victim of Nawab Bugti’s alleged atrocities? They have been displaced from their land. They have been living in inhumane conditions on the subsistence the government provides.

SSKM: This is propaganda. Those people left for Multan and Dera Ghazi Khan during Bhutto’s rule. They want to portray themselves as victims. He is a sardar. Why should he do such things? Given all its faults, the tribal system looks after the people. Why are the people with him? Why are the people with Nawab Marri? Because sardars are looked upon as elders, like a father figure. People don’t have to obey him.

DT: Don’t you think the tribal system is responsible for the backwardness and underdevelopment of Balochistan?

SSKM: What about Sindh? It has the wadera system; in Punjab you have Chaudhris; in the Frontier the Khans. The system is not confined to Balochistan. I agree that certain aspects of tribal system cannot be condoned. But with education and economic progress people will become more enlightened and things will settle down.

DT: But it is said that sardars do not allow their people to be educated?

SSKM: Have they got such powers? I have always opposed the sardari system. But one cannot replace something unless there is something better. Look at wadera shahi in Sindh, which the Baloch don’t have.

DT: Is the sardari system worse than wadera shahi?

SSKM: No. A sardar is accountable to his people in his kutchery. You have yourself seen this in Dera Bugti where people come every third day to discuss and settle issues.

DT: In a democratic way?

SSKM: Yes. The Baloch culture stresses three values: honour, valour and chivalry. A Baloch is bound to honour this above all else — including his life; he is expected to be courageous and display fortitude and generosity of spirit and large heartedness. It is a sardar’s duty to set an example of abiding by the Baloch code of honour. Feudalism has done much in recent years to erode the tribal code.

DT: Given the respect the Baloch generally give to womenfolk, why do we see more incidents of honour killing in areas where people live under a tribal set-up?

SSKM: This issue has been causing me grief. The tribal system refuses to change with time. The system of “syah kaari” may have worked as a deterrent in times past, but it has no place in modern times. Its sole long-term antidote is education. Education can broaden cultural horizons and help eradicate practices that have no place in the present.

DT: You were accused of running your area as an independent sardar, forcibly preventing people from approaching the police and courts. A committee of enquiry was set up by the Punjab government.

SSKM: In September 1954, the enquiry team cleared me of all charges. The local administration, with the collaboration of some family members, failed to prevent me from bringing change in the Mazari area. I was not quite 24 when I was acquitted of the charge of running “a parallel government” to the government of Pakistan.

DT: But you are opposed to the sardari system?

SSKM: Because in past some sardars misbehaved with their own people. They were sycophants of the British. I don’t approve of that.

DT: Don’t you think the Baloch struggle lacks leadership? For example, Nawab Bugti has remained the chief minister and governor of Balochistan. Many Baloch still do not trust him for his alleged pro-establishment role. They are reluctant to accept him as the sole leader.

SSKM: I know him [Bugti] closely. I have found him a straight and upright man. Look at the behaviour of this country’s other politicians. They change loyalty in no time. The day Musharraf is thrown out, you will see many people who will turn around and say that they didn’t like him, but “majboor thay”. This is not right.

DT: But Bugti was the tormentor of the then National Awami Party. He irreparably damaged the party when he disclosed NAP’s alleged London Plan (to work for the creation of Pukhtoonistan and Greater Balochistan). Some Baloch may not like him because of his opposition to the NAP and its leadership, which also included Sardar Attaullah Mengal, Nawab Marri and Ghous Bux Bizenjo.

SSKM: In those days, Akbar’s opposition to NAP was personal. He felt he had been humiliated by the NAP. Initially, Akbar was part of the NAP. Later, he became disillusioned and broke away after he felt that they had deceived and insulted him.

DT: Who were the NAP leaders Bugti didn’t like?

SSKM: He didn’t like Bizenjo. Bizenjo is no longer alive.

DT: Do you agree that the present Balochistan situation is similar to what happened in 1971?

SSKM: I had supported Mujibur Rahman. I was pleading with Bhutto for a settlement. But Bhutto was determined to crush Mujib. I think our generals held the Bengalis in contempt. The present Balochistan situation has some similarity to 1971.

DT: How can this problem be resolved?

SSKM: By more flexibility and understanding. General Musharraf claims to be the president... He should sort it out with understanding and sympathy. He must give them due respect.

DT: What should the sardars do?

SSKM: There are two or three sardars who really matter — Bugti, Marri and Mengal. In our culture if one is treated with respect and dignity and made an offer, one can’t say no.

DT: What offer?

SSKM: Offer of reaching an understanding... not of offices or perks. Musharraf must call them and hold talks.

DT: According to the government, Baloch leaders always come up with tough and “unrealistic” conditions. Almost all of them are seeking a solution outside the 1973 Constitution.

SSKM: Even in those days we didn’t accept Bhutto’s [1973] constitution. We walked out of the assembly, saying we wanted a constitution acceptable to all four provinces. But this didn’t happen because Punjab is running the show. The Baloch nationalists are demanding that the centre should retain defence, foreign affairs and currency, and to some extent, communications. The rest of the powers must be given to the provinces. That is the only way we can reach an understanding. Unfortunately, the rulers want everything for themselves. That is not acceptable.

DT: Don’t you agree with the government’s claim that it has initiated unprecedented development activities in Balochistan?

SSKM: They are boasting about what they have done. But let us see the practical side of it. How much of it is realistic, how much isn’t.

DT: How do you view India’s remarks over Balochistan? Don’t you consider it interference in Pakistan’s internal matters?

SSKM: I don’t think so. India is our neighbour. They have said, “Try to be understanding. Don’t go around doing what you are doing”.

DT: But it’s Pakistan’s internal matter.

SSKM: So we are told.

DT: What about reports that RAW has a hand in terrorist activities in Balochistan?

SSKM: We are making allegations against India and India is making allegations against us. This has been happening for the last 60 years. We must reach an understanding with India.

DT: Sub-nationalists fear that the Baloch population in Gwadar will be reduced to a small minority with the influx of manpower at the port.

SSKM: They have these apprehensions. The jobs in Gwadar are not all being given to the Baloch.

DT: But the development activities demand a huge skilled work force.

SSKM: Let them train the local people.

DT: But they also demand that the imported workforce or those who come in from elsewhere to settle in Gwadar should not be given the right to vote.

SSKM: The Baloch are few in number. Numerically, they cannot compete with any other province. Things will settle down once their reservations are addressed.

DT: What is your opinion about the three cantonments the government is going to set up in Balochistan?

SSKM: Why set up cantonments? Because you want to control Balochistan?

DT: But there were cantonments in Quetta and Khuzdar already?

SSKM: Those have been there since the British. There’s no justification in setting up more cantonments.

DT: It is said that the cantonments will help secure the area against subversive activities because of the threats from the former Taliban and the Al Qaeda.

SSKM: What nonsense. There are no fanatical Muslims in Balochistan. They are the most secular people in Pakistan.

DT: Do you think that organisations such as BLA and BLF have contributed towards the woes of the Baloch people because of their anti-state activities?

SSKM: I think the Baloch sympathise with them. People think, “if we can’t do anything, let them do something”.

DT: Are BLA and BLF activities justified?

SSKM: No. But by the same token I can understand their feelings.

DT: So where do you see Pakistan in the next two or three years.

SSKM: I am worried. I love my country. I left Dehradoon (India) and came to Pakistan by choice. I want my country to be stable, to prosper and to progress. But this is not the way to progress.
Let us learn to live and let live. Let us sit together, discuss and settle the issues. We are all Pakistanis. We must address issues like poverty, lack of education and healthcare for the people of the entire country. *

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...1-1-2006_pg3_5