A comment by Pakistani, SardarWatch response

No doubt that misunderstandings and injustices are likely to happen but it is always in a house matter and should be solved with mutual understanding. Has anyone ever seen the kids calling the neighbours for help in case of differences with their parents? Brahamdagh is not the representative of whole Balochistan and those who know Balochistan well will endorse my point. His late grand father deprived a faction of his own clan Kalpar Bugtis and ousted them from Dera Bugti. What does he say about that injustice before showing concern for ‘Whole’ Balochistan. Everyone knows who is behind the game and soon this insurgency shall die. Insha’Allah —- chasif
——————————

SardarWatch response

chasif Sahib,
Your point is well accepted, we at Sardar Watch welcome your concerns for pokistan aka pakistan, it is expected, no surprise. We completely understand from where you are comming.These sardars controle every aspect of baloch life, be it freedom struggle, be it parliamentary politics, economic, social, political etc etc etc. Where are common middle class educated baloch leaders?  Did Pokistan ever thought of promoting middle class educated baloch  to cut to size these overgrown, fat ass, sardars? We common middle class educated baloch people have 2 enemies, Sardars and Pakistan, while both work together and squeez baloch people, we are denied all opportunities to develop and take part in development of Balochistan. Our fight will continue and will see the end of Sardars hegemony in political sphere.

Never trust feudal lords, barons, says Dr. Wahid Baloch as Khan ditches him

Ralph Peters, left, with Dr. Wahid Baloch.

Dr.Wahid Baloch (Left) with Ralph Peters (Right)

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11598884-never-trust-feudal-lords-barons-says-dr-wahid-baloch

 Feb 27, 2012 at 9:49 PM PST
 

He feels cheated.

The man says he worked tirelessly to promote the tribal notable who is said to have used and ditched him reportedly after his need was over.

Dr. Wahid Baloch Monday said, “All these Khans, Nawabs and Sardars think that all ordinary Balochs are their pawn and tools, to be used and discarded as they wish.”

Dr. Baloch requested middle class Baloch to shun these Khans, Nawabs and Sardars and unite themselves and take the leadership in their own hand instead of becoming their pawns.

“My example is an excellent lesson to be learned. I absolutely regret what I did for this Khan and I’ll make sure I will not repeat this mistake again in my life,” Dr. Baloch said.

Dr. Baloch, who is founder of the Baloch Society of North America says he had promoted the tribal notable the Khan of Kalat Mir Suleman Daud Ahmadzai as “His Highness” for six years now. He now vows he will not call the Khan “His Highness.”

Unlike Mahatma Gandhi of India who left his life of comforts for his people, most Baloch feudals and barons appear adamant to keep their decadent titles — nawab, sardar and mir — and privileges.

Many of them, called parasites of Baloch society, need a “munshi” or secretary even for small tasks.

Sardars were slaves of British Raj, now Pokistan

” The powers of the Sardars or feudal lords were limited in the Barrohi tenure of rule, till the British jumped in. These Sardars held a consultative position in the matters of importance and in deciding tribal cases. They were as a sort of Conciliatory commission. Their Duty was that of an Arbitrator of peace between the contending parties. In case they failed, the matter was referred to the Khan-the Supreme Power-who in return forwarded it to the Qazi-ul-Quzzat (chief judge) for the final decision. Such was the position of the Sardars in the Criminal cases, while civil cases were directly dealt by the Qazi. The Khan was the Court of Appeal in all matters concerning the tribes of the conquered areas. The Sardars (tribal chiefs) were given jagirs by the Khan, and consequently they supplied the Khan with men and material in emergencies. Failing to produce specified quota of men, their jagirs were confiscated. Regarding internal affairs, the Khan acted quite independently in making laws and various other changes in the administrative spheres. While in his dealings with external matters, the feudal lords acted as a sort of Advisory Council. It was Naseer Khan, who had appointed tribal chiefs through General Elections of the tribe, by the headmen. Seniority in age and personal distinction were the deciding factors in the nomination of the tribal chief.( page 85,History of Baluch race, by Muhammad Sardar Baluch.1958).

When the British came and started setting up their new class orders, they met with problems in the Nazimate regions/ Sir Robert Sandeman was of the view owing to the democratic setup found amongst the tribes, the Head-men (Tumandars) if unsupported could not enforce Authority over the unruly spirits and in order to preserve what influence they possessed, they were compelled to follow the path where the unruly spirits lead (unruly being those who opposed the British).But the balance of power was turned, when the Tumandars were given the means to entertain armed servants of their own, and when supported by suitable allowances and the prestige of connection with ”OUR’ power. They then can exert themselves successfully, to keep their tribes in order.(p-304,Sir Robert Sandeman by T.H.Thornton.1895).

Though as we see the British created a new class, to quote just two examples Mihrullah Khan Marri and Shahbaz Khan Bugti were made Nawabs in January 1890,by the British Government of India.

But what most miss; the conditions attached with all these titles and grants .

They were all subject to 7 terms which were as under:

1) To be continued to a single ‘Designate’ heir.

2) And Conditionally on the Government pleasure.

3) Heir to be chosen by the Government.

4) Information services to be provided during the term in office.

5) Subject to good behavior while in service to the Government.

6) For service and position.

7) Government services to be rendered on call, with the retainers.

(PRAP(R) feb 1896).

Of sardars and sarkars

PAKISTAN has protested vehemently against the US congressional resolution on Balochistan. Regardless of the motives behind this resolution, it is clear that the Balochistan issue has gone global because of its mishandling by successive Pakistani leaders.

Interior Minister Rehman Malik has blamed external powers for conspiring to detach Balochistan from Pakistan. While the involvement of foreign hands may not be ruled out, that of the domestic hand in pushing the province to an insurgency-like situation is undeniable.

Since Independence, the people of Balochistan have been exploited and discriminated against by successive sardars (tribal chiefs) and sarkars (regimes both military and civilian). The British colonial system provided full support to the tribal ruling class under the Frontier Crimes Regulation Act (1901) and backed the sardars loyal to the Raj. If the centuries-old sardari system is generally blamed for the prevailing backwardness in the province, the governments and bureaucracies have
perpetuated the system.

Successive sarkars in Islamabad left the people of Balochistan at the mercy of the sardars. The latter continued to exploit, while the former facilitated the exploitation through policies of neglect and discrimination. Both parties were motivated by the sole agenda of perpetuating their rule, and they developed a somewhat symbiotic relationship with the common man on the receiving end. At the local level people were oppressed and deprived of basic rights and freedoms; at the official level they were discriminated against and neglected.

The institution of the sardar was formally abolished by the System of Sardari (Abolition) Act, 1976. Ironically, it says in the preamble: “The system of sardari, prevalent in certain parts of Pakistan, is the worst remnant of the oppressive feudal and tribal system which, being derogatory to human dignity and freedom, is repugnant to the spirit of democracy and equality as enunciated by Islam and enshrined in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and opposed to the economic advancement of the people.”

Neither the sardars nor the sarkars had an agenda for the socio-economic uplift of the people of the province. Today, it has fallen almost a century behind the country’s other, better-developed regions.

Balochistan’s social-sector indicators place it in the category of the least developed and most backward provinces of the country. This is the result of using the measure of rupees per capita instead of the provision of public service per capita for distribution from the divisible pool over the past six decades.

Although copper and gold has been mined from the Saindak project in Chagai district for the past nine years, the people of Chagai are living virtually in the mediaeval age, deprived as they are of even basic facilities. If Chagai ever attracted Islamabad’s attention, it was for either the nuclear tests or its mineral wealth. The socio-economic conditions of its people have never attracted the attention of Islamabad’s decision-makers. Baloch nationalist parties resented Islamabad’s firm control over the management of the provincial economy. Meanwhile, the idea of rapid economic progress posed a threat to the centuries-old feudal status of the sardars.

The parliamentary committee constituted under the government of Pervez Musharraf talked with Baloch nationalist leaders and prepared recommendations to end conflict in the province. But the committee’s efforts for carving out a political solution came to naught as the government opted for a military solution. The killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti in 2006 added fuel to the fire.

Already trapped in poverty and underdevelopment, Balochistan had to bear the additional economic, social and human costs of a number of military operations. These brought more destruction and intensified the feelings of alienation in the province.Baloch nationalist parties gave some hope to the people but ultimately, they failed or became part of the problem.

Then emerged a group of urbanised, educated youths that was equally frustrated with the sardars, the sarkars and the nationalists. Today the separatists, who are operating outside the country’s constitutional framework, are fuelling the fire of a struggle for an independent Balochistan. Target killings, bomb blasts and attacks on public properties, gas installations and police and law-enforcement agencies have become routine.

The delineation of separatists from nationalists would be a step in the right direction but currently, they are being treated as synonymous. The assassination of moderate Baloch nationalist leaders such as Habib Jalib, who was killed by unidentified assassins in Quetta in 2010, has strengthened the separatists’ hand. The repression of nationalist forces will cause this process to continue.

Separatism needs to be contained through strengthening Baloch nationalists. If the nationalist parties were successful in redressing the people’s grievances, the separatists would lose support.

The crisis in Balochistan spans economic, social and political dimensions. Its resolution demands a realistic approach that addresses the root causes. The issue is the imposition of the centre’s own version of development of the province’s resources; it is about giving the province a sense of ownership.

The US has not served the Baloch cause by voicing its concerns. In fact, the US is guided by its own geopolitical interests. The province, however, is reeling under the repercussions of the US-led wars in Afghanistan, first launched against Soviet forces during the early ’80s and then against the Taliban. But for how long will we protest over American concern and comments on the issue?

If a person’s house is on fire, he’d better invest all his energies in extinguishing the blaze rather than asking others to stop voicing their concern. Balochistan is Pakistan’s internal matter and it is up to this country to put its own house in order.

The writer is the author of Economic Development of Balochistan.

sfazlehaider05@yahoo.com

Urbanization, Detribalization of Baloch people is must to break the back of sardars

The Baloch constitute a nation distinct from that of the Persians and Punjabis by every fundamental test of nationhood, firstly that of a separate historical past in the region at least as ancient as that of their neighbours, secondly by the fact of their being a cultural and linguistic entity entirely different from that of the Persians and Punjabis, with an unsurpassed classical heritage and a developed language which makes Baloch fully adequate for all present-day needs and finally by reason of their territorial habitation of definite areas.
The political situation of Baloch today reflects two contradictory tendencies. As the warrior Sher Mohammed Marri in the early 1990s stated, “Baloch nationalism has penetrated the masses and is not confined to the Nawabs and Sardars alone”. The urbanization, detribalization and the migration of the Baloch people to the cities of the region, have contributed to the development of mass national consciousness. Yet their political leaderships have often fallen prey to internal divisions on both ideological and tribal lines. Division between the Balochs’ political parties started with Zia’s party less elections in 1985, and later it sharpened during the so-called 1990s democracy. The regional aspects of the Baloch society have greatly complicated the task of the Baloch national movement in achieving unity and a coherent strategy to achieve their goals.

(The National Question and Right of Self Determination. By:Dr. Inayat ullah Baloch)

POLL: Behaviour of Sardars if we get Independence now

POLL: Behaviour of Sardars if we get Independence now

 

Know this fact about Khair Bux Mari & family

Nawab Mehrullah Mari, father of famous Baloch leader Khair Bux Mari, didn’t allow British government to open a primary school in his area some 95 years ago.  Sardars always wanted to keep people away from education.