Armstrong
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 19,390
- Reaction score
- 94
- Country
- Location
I'm writing this post to try to dispel some of the historical & anthropological inaccuracies that have crept up about Baluchistan :
Inaccuracy Number (1)
Before joining Pakistan, Baluchistan in general (& the Kalat State in particular) was a sovereign independent country !
The Imperial Gazetteer of India states as thus : The rulers of Kalat were never fully independent. There was always, as there is still, a paramount power to whom they were subject. In the earliest times they were merely petty chiefs; later they bowed to the orders of the Mughal emperors of Delhi and to the rulers of Kandahar, and supplied men-at-arms on demand. Most peremptory orders from the Afghan rulers to their vassals of Kalat are still extant, and the pre-dominance of the Sadozais and Barakzais was acknowledged so late as 1838. It was not until the time of Nasir Khan I [1750-1] that the titles of Beglar Begi (Chief of Chiefs) and Wali-i-Kalat (Governor of Kalat) were conferred on the Kalat ruler by the Afghan kings ! 1
Furthermore the British Government had not granted Provincial Status to Baluchistan but had instead divided it into 'British Baluchistan' & 'Agencies' in the following manner :
(1) British Baluchistan consisted of territories obtained by treaty or conquered or obtained on lease from the Khan of Kalat. 2
(2) Baluchistan Agencies included the states of Kalat, Las Bela, Kharan & the Tribal Areas of Marris, Bugtis, Megals & Others. The British Political Agent dealt with these states & tribes. 3
Additionally until quite recently Baluchistan was divided into 'B' Areas & Quetta & this had continued since British Times.4
Thus it is quite self-evident that the Administrative Structure of Baluchistan was not modeled around it being a sovereign & independent state but rather a patchwork of autonomous & directly administered regions under the patronage of the British Government. And so in all fairness the The founder of the Baluchistan Province as it now exists was (a British Indian Officer & Administer by the name of) Sir Robert Sandeman 5 who dealt with the Baluch Tribes & the States with admirable tact.
Inaccuracy Number (2)
Baluchistan was forcibly annexed & made a part of Pakistan !
On June 29, 1947, the Shahi Jirga of the British Balochistan (as a consultative/representative body of the
AGG) along with the elected members of Quetta municipal body, unanimously passed a resolution of forming part of Pakistan (a few non Muslim members, however, did not take part in the vote). This resolution satisfied the legal provision of ascertaining the choice of the people of British Balochistan as required by June 03 draft and when the Independence of India Act was passed by the British Parliament on July 18, 1947, the province of British Balochistan was to become a part of Pakistan without any further qualification or provision. 6
A detailed explanation of the proceedings at the Shahi Jirga are as follows : Fifty four members of the Shahi Jirga and Quetta Municipality voted en bloc to join Pakistan. The eight non-Muslim members of the Quetta
Municipality and the Shahi Jirga (seven Hindus and one Parsi) did not
attend the meeting. 7
Furthermore the results of the Shahi Jirga & the ensuing inclusion of British Baluchistan into the Dominion of Pakistan is also duly noted in the Indian Independence Act of 1947 which reads as follows : Subject to the provisions of subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the territories of Pakistan shall be........the territories which, at the date of the passing of this Act, are included in the Province of Sind and the Chief Commissioner's Province of British Baluchistan....... 8
After the bulk of present day Baluchistan had already ceded to the Dominion of Pakistan, the fate of the Kalat State & of Makran, Lasbella & Kharan remained.
Apparently the Khan of Kalat had 'some discrete intention of an independent or quasi independent status of some kind which was not provided by the Independence of India Act that applied to all the 562 Indian States. While he was withholding the decision on accession, the other three states of Kharan, Makran and Lasbela called off the mutual suzerainty arrangements and separately acceded to Pakistan in March, 1948 leaving only the state of Kalat taking its time to decide its future.' 9
But as mentioned above : "The rulers of the states of Kharan, Makran and Lasbela announced their decision to join the Pakistan dominion on 21 March 1948 and their respective rulers signed the official documents." 10
Therefore 'In the last resort, it is reported, the Khan of Kalat called a meeting of tribal Sardars but none turned up because on February 12, 1948 at Sibi they had promised with Quaid-e-Azam allegiance for Pakistan. The Khan eventually declared accession of the state of Kalat to Pakistan on March 22, 1948.' 11,12
However I'm not too sure about the accuracy of the 'date' of accession because I've read March 27, 1948 as a possible date as well.
A decade later on 7th or 8th September 1958 Pakistan purchased Gwadar from Oman.
Inaccuracy Number (3)
Okay now this one is more of an implied inaccuracy than a deliberate one : Baluchistan is more or less ethnically & linguistically homogeneous & the Separatists are fighting for all Baluchistanis or most Baluchistanis !
Now leaving aside the fact that the Separatists don't represent the Baluch People because only '37% of Baluch want Independence form Pakistan' 13 & what could be the break-up of this 37% figure & how neglect & bad governance by the State is responsible for much of these 37% of the People loosing faith in the State, I'm not going to go into that for that has been discussed to death already & because the purpose of this 'post' is to dispel 'historical & anthropological inaccuracies' not debate about who is or who isn't with Pakistan !
Therefore the ethnic make-up of Baluchistan must be understood & kept in mind to dispel the 'anthropological' inaccuracy mentioned above :
The Historical Ethno-Linguistic Make-Up of Baluchistan was as follows : Towards the end of the first Anglo-Afghan War (1838-42) the demographic state of this region was 300,000 Brahuis, 200,000 Pushtuns and only 80,000 Baluchis. 14
According to an earlier 1981 Census Report,
linguistically, there were 38.28 percent Balochis, 25.15 percent Pushtuns
and 22.02 percent Brahuis and the remainder 14.55 percent spoke other languages. 15
The latest Census Report of Balochistan Province of 1998, has grouped together Balochis and Brahuis, making a total of 54.76 percent besides 45.24 per cent Pushtuns and others, who speak Sindhi, Punjabi, Saraiki, Urdu, etc 16
This 45.24% figure is further broken down into linguistic line as Urdu (0.97%), Punjabi (2.52%), Sindhi (5.58%), Pushto (29.64%), Balochi (54.76% - which includes Barahui) , Saraiki (2.42%) & Others (4.11%). 17
Now even if one were to group the Baluch with the Barahui Speakers then it is quite evident that Baluchistan is ethnically & linguistically quite diverse & therefore it is most erroneous to look at Baluchistan from the lens of a single ethnicity with a single political aspiration & a single historical narrative for it !
Thank You !
References :
' @Secur @Hyperion @Marshmallow @jaibi @Talon @DESERT FIGHTER @Irfan Baloch @TaimiKhan @WebMaster @Aeronaut @Areesh @Azlan Haider @Emmie @levina @notorious_eagle @HRK @LoveIcon @KingMamba @ZYXW @cb4 @Icarus @Xeric @RAMPAGE @Raja.Pakistani @Donatello @EyanKhan @Khan_patriot @Jazzbot @Leader @waz @farhan_9909 @Informant @Rashid Mahmood @Ghareeb_Da_Baal @Spring Onion @Aamna14 @chauvunist @Joe Shearer @A.Rafay @Developereo
Inaccuracy Number (1)
Before joining Pakistan, Baluchistan in general (& the Kalat State in particular) was a sovereign independent country !
The Imperial Gazetteer of India states as thus : The rulers of Kalat were never fully independent. There was always, as there is still, a paramount power to whom they were subject. In the earliest times they were merely petty chiefs; later they bowed to the orders of the Mughal emperors of Delhi and to the rulers of Kandahar, and supplied men-at-arms on demand. Most peremptory orders from the Afghan rulers to their vassals of Kalat are still extant, and the pre-dominance of the Sadozais and Barakzais was acknowledged so late as 1838. It was not until the time of Nasir Khan I [1750-1] that the titles of Beglar Begi (Chief of Chiefs) and Wali-i-Kalat (Governor of Kalat) were conferred on the Kalat ruler by the Afghan kings ! 1
Furthermore the British Government had not granted Provincial Status to Baluchistan but had instead divided it into 'British Baluchistan' & 'Agencies' in the following manner :
(1) British Baluchistan consisted of territories obtained by treaty or conquered or obtained on lease from the Khan of Kalat. 2
(2) Baluchistan Agencies included the states of Kalat, Las Bela, Kharan & the Tribal Areas of Marris, Bugtis, Megals & Others. The British Political Agent dealt with these states & tribes. 3
Additionally until quite recently Baluchistan was divided into 'B' Areas & Quetta & this had continued since British Times.4
Thus it is quite self-evident that the Administrative Structure of Baluchistan was not modeled around it being a sovereign & independent state but rather a patchwork of autonomous & directly administered regions under the patronage of the British Government. And so in all fairness the The founder of the Baluchistan Province as it now exists was (a British Indian Officer & Administer by the name of) Sir Robert Sandeman 5 who dealt with the Baluch Tribes & the States with admirable tact.
Inaccuracy Number (2)
Baluchistan was forcibly annexed & made a part of Pakistan !
On June 29, 1947, the Shahi Jirga of the British Balochistan (as a consultative/representative body of the
AGG) along with the elected members of Quetta municipal body, unanimously passed a resolution of forming part of Pakistan (a few non Muslim members, however, did not take part in the vote). This resolution satisfied the legal provision of ascertaining the choice of the people of British Balochistan as required by June 03 draft and when the Independence of India Act was passed by the British Parliament on July 18, 1947, the province of British Balochistan was to become a part of Pakistan without any further qualification or provision. 6
A detailed explanation of the proceedings at the Shahi Jirga are as follows : Fifty four members of the Shahi Jirga and Quetta Municipality voted en bloc to join Pakistan. The eight non-Muslim members of the Quetta
Municipality and the Shahi Jirga (seven Hindus and one Parsi) did not
attend the meeting. 7
Furthermore the results of the Shahi Jirga & the ensuing inclusion of British Baluchistan into the Dominion of Pakistan is also duly noted in the Indian Independence Act of 1947 which reads as follows : Subject to the provisions of subsections (3) and (4) of this section, the territories of Pakistan shall be........the territories which, at the date of the passing of this Act, are included in the Province of Sind and the Chief Commissioner's Province of British Baluchistan....... 8
After the bulk of present day Baluchistan had already ceded to the Dominion of Pakistan, the fate of the Kalat State & of Makran, Lasbella & Kharan remained.
Apparently the Khan of Kalat had 'some discrete intention of an independent or quasi independent status of some kind which was not provided by the Independence of India Act that applied to all the 562 Indian States. While he was withholding the decision on accession, the other three states of Kharan, Makran and Lasbela called off the mutual suzerainty arrangements and separately acceded to Pakistan in March, 1948 leaving only the state of Kalat taking its time to decide its future.' 9
But as mentioned above : "The rulers of the states of Kharan, Makran and Lasbela announced their decision to join the Pakistan dominion on 21 March 1948 and their respective rulers signed the official documents." 10
Therefore 'In the last resort, it is reported, the Khan of Kalat called a meeting of tribal Sardars but none turned up because on February 12, 1948 at Sibi they had promised with Quaid-e-Azam allegiance for Pakistan. The Khan eventually declared accession of the state of Kalat to Pakistan on March 22, 1948.' 11,12
However I'm not too sure about the accuracy of the 'date' of accession because I've read March 27, 1948 as a possible date as well.
A decade later on 7th or 8th September 1958 Pakistan purchased Gwadar from Oman.
Inaccuracy Number (3)
Okay now this one is more of an implied inaccuracy than a deliberate one : Baluchistan is more or less ethnically & linguistically homogeneous & the Separatists are fighting for all Baluchistanis or most Baluchistanis !
Now leaving aside the fact that the Separatists don't represent the Baluch People because only '37% of Baluch want Independence form Pakistan' 13 & what could be the break-up of this 37% figure & how neglect & bad governance by the State is responsible for much of these 37% of the People loosing faith in the State, I'm not going to go into that for that has been discussed to death already & because the purpose of this 'post' is to dispel 'historical & anthropological inaccuracies' not debate about who is or who isn't with Pakistan !
Therefore the ethnic make-up of Baluchistan must be understood & kept in mind to dispel the 'anthropological' inaccuracy mentioned above :
The Historical Ethno-Linguistic Make-Up of Baluchistan was as follows : Towards the end of the first Anglo-Afghan War (1838-42) the demographic state of this region was 300,000 Brahuis, 200,000 Pushtuns and only 80,000 Baluchis. 14
According to an earlier 1981 Census Report,
linguistically, there were 38.28 percent Balochis, 25.15 percent Pushtuns
and 22.02 percent Brahuis and the remainder 14.55 percent spoke other languages. 15
The latest Census Report of Balochistan Province of 1998, has grouped together Balochis and Brahuis, making a total of 54.76 percent besides 45.24 per cent Pushtuns and others, who speak Sindhi, Punjabi, Saraiki, Urdu, etc 16
This 45.24% figure is further broken down into linguistic line as Urdu (0.97%), Punjabi (2.52%), Sindhi (5.58%), Pushto (29.64%), Balochi (54.76% - which includes Barahui) , Saraiki (2.42%) & Others (4.11%). 17
Now even if one were to group the Baluch with the Barahui Speakers then it is quite evident that Baluchistan is ethnically & linguistically quite diverse & therefore it is most erroneous to look at Baluchistan from the lens of a single ethnicity with a single political aspiration & a single historical narrative for it !
Thank You !
References :
- Imperial Gazetteer of India: Provincial Series: Balochistan (Calcutta, 1908, reprint Lahore: Oriental Publishers, 1976), 14
- These comprised Sibi, Duki, Pishin, and Chaman obtained under the Treaty of Gandamak in 1879 and formally declared part of British India in 1887. The “administered areas” of British Balochistan also included Chagai, Loralai (except Duki) and the territories leased from the Khan of Kalat, including Quetta, Bolan, Nushki and Nasirabad. These comprised Sibi, Duki, Pishin, and Chaman obtained under the Treaty of Gandamak in 1879 and formally declared part of British India in 1887. The “administered areas” of British Balochistan also included Chagai, Loralai (except Duki) and the territories leased from the Khan of Kalat, including Quetta, Bolan, Nushki and Nasirabad. These comprised Sibi, Duki, Pishin, and Chaman obtained under the Treaty of Gandamak in 1879 and formally declared part of British India in 1887. The “administered areas” of British Balochistan also included Chagai, Loralai (except Duki) and the territories leased from the Khan of Kalat, including Quetta, Bolan, Nushki and Nasirabad (IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, ix)
- British Political Agent controlled Kalat. A native official, who resided at Khuzdar, was appointed to assist in respect of Jhalawan. Makran was under the control of a Kalat official known as the Nazim. The rest of Kalat was divided into niabats who were Kalat officials. Las Bela and Kharan had become practically independent of the Khan and were administered by the Political Agent of Kalat. (IPRI Journal, Summer 2006, vol. XI, no. 2, 56-73.) as reproduced in the (IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, ix).
- Since British rule and till recently, except for Quetta, the rest of Balochistan was
governed according to their established riwaj (customs) under the overall control of
the respective Sardars (IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, xi)
- Imperial Gazetteer, 12.
- Pildat Issue Paper - The Baluchistan Conflict, March 2012, pg.13.
- (IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, vi).
- Indian Independence Act 1947. 10 & II GEO. 6. CH. 30. Section 2 titled 'Territories of the New Dominions', pg 1 (A2).
- Pildat Issue Paper - The Baluchistan Conflict, March 2012, pg.14.
- Siddiqi (2012), p. 60
- Pildat Issue Paper - The Baluchistan Conflict, March 2012, pg.14.
- Syed Iqbal Ahmad, Balochistan: Its strategic importance, pg.
119-120. - 37pc Baloch favour independence: UK survey - thenews.com.pk
- Frontier and Overseas Expeditions from India: Baluchistan & the First Afghan War(Reprinted Lahore: Book Traders, n.d.), 1. reference obtained from IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, viii.
- 1981 Census Report of Balochistan Province (Islamabad: Population Census Organization Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan),10. reference obtained from IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, viii-ix.
- 1998 Census Report of Balochistan (Islamabad: Population Census Organization Statistics
Division, Government of Pakistan reference obtained from IPRFI Fact File - Baluchistan : Facts & Fiction, ix. - Population Census Organisation: PAKISTAN - CENSUS reference obtained from Pildat Issue Paper - The Baluchistan Conflict, March 2012, pg.10
' @Secur @Hyperion @Marshmallow @jaibi @Talon @DESERT FIGHTER @Irfan Baloch @TaimiKhan @WebMaster @Aeronaut @Areesh @Azlan Haider @Emmie @levina @notorious_eagle @HRK @LoveIcon @KingMamba @ZYXW @cb4 @Icarus @Xeric @RAMPAGE @Raja.Pakistani @Donatello @EyanKhan @Khan_patriot @Jazzbot @Leader @waz @farhan_9909 @Informant @Rashid Mahmood @Ghareeb_Da_Baal @Spring Onion @Aamna14 @chauvunist @Joe Shearer @A.Rafay @Developereo
Last edited by a moderator:
you forgot to mention @
