|
 |
|
Baluch nationalism |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Genral Information About Baluch People |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Genral Information About Baluch people & Baluchistan
Balochistan is located in the eastern part of the Middle East, linking Central Asian states with the Indian subcontinent, the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean.
The Baloch landscape covers approximately 690,000 sq. km. Out of its total area about two hundred and eighty thousand (280,000) sq. km. is occupied by Iran, 350,000 sq. km by Pakistan (Including the Baloch populated districts of Sindh and Punjab) and some sixty thousand sq. km. (60,000) was given by the British imperial forces to Afghanistan under the Anglo-Afghan boundary commission decision in 1896. Balochistan commands more than 900 miles of the Arabian coast line and the Persian Gulf.
People
Population
The total population of Baloch is 13 to 15 million people. Although there are no independent figures about Baloch population in Iran, it is approximated at 4 million Baloch, who do not enjoy even limited political and cultural autonomy. The Baloch population is deliberately sidelined and marginalized in policy and practice by the occupant governments.
Language
The Baloch speak Balochi and Brahui derived from the Indo-European - and Dravidian branches of language respectively.
Culture and religion
The majority of Baloch are Sunni Muslims with small minorities of Shia and Zekri.
Balochs are ancient people. In 325 BC, as Alexander the great after his abortive India campaign, made his way back to Babylon through Makuran desert, the Greeks suffered greatly at the hands of marauding Balochs.
The poet Firdausi records them in the Persian epic, the Book of Kings, thus: �;;;Heroic Balochs and Kuches we saw/Like battling rams all determined on war. Ethnically, Balochs are no longer homogeneous, since the original nucleus that migrated from the Caspian Sea (Northern side of the plateau of Iran) has absorbed a variety of disparate groups along the way. Among these "new" Baloch were displaced tribes from Central Asia, driven southward by the Turkish and Mongol invasions from the tenth through the thirteenth centuries, and fugitive Arab factions defeated in intra-Arab warfare.
Nevertheless, in cultural terms, the Baloch have been remarkably successful in preserving a distinctive identity in the face of continual pressures from strong cultures in neighbouring areas.
Despite the isolation of the scattered pastoral communities in Balochistan, the Balochi language and a relatively uniform Baloch folklore tradition and value system have provided a common denominator for the diverse Baloch tribal groupings scattered over the vast area from the Indus River in the east to the Iranian province of Kerman in the west. To a great extent, it is the vitality of this ancient cultural heritage that explains the tenacity of the present demand for the political recognition of Baloch identity. However, the strength of Baloch nationalism is also rooted in proud historical memories of determined resistance against the would-be conquerors who perennially attempted, without success, to annex all or part of Balochistan to their adjacent empires.
Economy
Traditionally the people of Balochistan are farmers but in the coastal area fishery is also a source of living for them. Although Balochistan is rich in gas, oil, gold and other minerals and marine resources, as a result of being occupied and not trusted by the occupant regimes, the people of Balochistan are not benefiting from their vast resources and hence live in some of the poorest conditions in South East Asia.
Environmental problems
In May 1998, Pakistan carried out a series of nuclear tests in the Chagahi Hills region of Eastern Balochistan. It is widely accepted that high doses of radiation are harmful and can cause various diseases like leukaemia. The aftermath of atomic bomb explosions and fallout from nuclear weapons testing and radiation accidents are proof of this.
The fallout particles enter the water supply and are inhaled and ingested, affecting communities perhaps thousands of miles from the blast site.
The water supply of Chagahi region before the nuclear tests conducted in this area was in ample quantity but now people have come to the streets to protest against acute shortage of water in Chagahi town and its surrounding areas.
Staging of protests against shortage of water in scorching heat has become routine here in Chaghi area. An official of international aid agency Nasrullah Warraich who is posted in Chaghi, said the nearly forty per cent of population has started migration from Chagahi due to acute shortage of water. He said that people have come out onto the streets and started migrating from the area due to severe heat where no portable water is available for human beings or animals.
For an agricultural community a shortage of water in what were already parched desert conditions are detrimental to the livelihoods of thousands, which are further exacerbated by the absence of any other employment opportunities in the area.
Water shortages are merely one direct consequence of the nuclear testing with other more severe consequences yet to reveal in time as is still taking place in the aftermath of Chernobyl. What is awaiting future generations of Baloch in terms of exposure to radiation and the often accompanied birth defects, one can only wait and see.
History
Through most of their history the Baloch administered themselves as a loose tribal confederacy.
The current Balochistan is divided into three parts namely Northern Balochistan, Western Balochistan and Eastern Balochistan which are controlled respectively by the three countries of Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan.
Some of the earliest human civilizations emerged in Balochistan. Mehrgar the earliest civilization known to mankind is located in Eastern Balochistan; the Kech civilization in central Makuran dates back to 4000 BC; The Burned city near Dozaap (Zahidan), the provincial capital of Western Balochistan, dates back to 2000 BC.
Among the most significant invasions of Balochistan was the Arab incursion in the seventh century AD, which brought far-reaching social, religious, economic and political changes into the region. In 644 AD an Arab army, under the command of Hakam, defeated the combined forces of Makuran and Sindh. The period of Arab rule brought the religion of Islam to the area. The Baloch tribes gradually embraced Islam, replacing their centuries-old religion.
During the anarchic and chaotic last phases of Arab rule, the Baloch tribes established their own semi-independent tribal confederacies, which were frequently threatened and overwhelmed by the stronger forces and dynasties of surrounding areas.
The period from 1400 to 1948 AD can be distinguished for the declining grip of the surrounding powers on Balochistan and the rise of Baloch influence. The predominance of Baloch socio-political and cultural institutions is the characteristic of this period. By the 18th century Kalat was the dominant power in Balochistan and the Khan of Kalat was the ruler of Balochistan.
The British first came to the region in 1839 on their way to Kabul when they sought safe passage. In 1841 they entered into a treaty with Kalat state. The British annexed Sindh in 1843 from the Talpur Mirs, a Baloch dynasty. In 1876, the British, however forced another treaty on the Baloch and forced the Khan of Kalat to lease Quetta city to them. The Khan's writ still ran over Balochistan, but now under the watchful eye of a British minister.
Historically, the British occupation of the Baloch State of Kalat in 1839 was perhaps the greatest event and turning point in Baloch history. From the very day the British forces occupied Kalat state, Baloch destiny changed dramatically. The painful consequences for the Baloch were the partition of their land and perpetual occupation by foreign forces.
In 1849, an Iranian army defeated Baloch forces in Kerman and captured Bumpur. The Baloch political status was changed radically in later decades, when in 19th century the British and Persian Empires divided Balochistan into spheres of influence, between the British Empire in India and the Persian Kingdom. The Anglo-Afghan wars and subsequent events in Persia in respect of �;;;the great game played out between Tsarist Russia and the British Empire further marginalized the Baloch people.
Baloch tribes in the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century showed their disdain of the unnatural and unjust partition through their revolts against British and Persian rule. Gul Khan Naseer, a Baloch historian, writer and poet, wrote: "Due to the decisions of (boundary) Commissions more than half of the territory of Balochistan came under the possession of Iran and less than half of it was given to Afghanistan.
The factor for the division of a lord-less Balochistan was to please and control Iran and Afghanistan governments against Russia" in favour of Britain. In 1932, the Baloch Conference of Jacobabad voiced itself against the Iranian occupation of Western Baluchistan. In 1933, Mir Abdul Aziz Kurd, a prominent national leader of Balochistan, showed his opposition to the partition and division of Balochistan by publishing the first map of Greater Balochistan. In 1934, Magassi, the head of the Baloch national movement, suggested an armed struggle for the liberation and unification of Balochistan. However, it was a difficult task because of its division into several parts, each part with a different constitutional and political status.
The Baloch in Western Balochistan have been in constant rebellion against the domination and discrimination by chauvinistic policy of Persian regimes e.g.:
1. The revolt of Jask in 1873.
2. The revolt of Sarhad in 1888.
3. The general uprising in 1889.
4. A major uprising under Baloch chieftain Sardar Hussein Narui in 1896 provoked a joint Anglo-Persian expeditionary force to crush the struggle of Baloch. After two years Baloch resistance was defeated and Chief Narui was arrested.
The death of Muzzafar ul Din Shah and the declining power of the Qajar dynasty in Persia and furthermore the preoccupation of British Colonial army dealing with the Baloch uprisings in Eastern Balochistan gave the Baloch in the Western part prospects.
The Baloch tribal chiefs took this chance and began consolidating their hold on the Baloch territories in West Balochistan. In the beginning of the twentieth century Bahram Khan gained control of almost the entire central and southern region of Western Balochistan, ending the occupation of Baloch-lands. Ultimately in 1916 the British Empire recognized Bahram Khan as the effective ruler of Western Balochistan.
Bahram Khan�;;;s nephew, Mir Dost Muhammed Khan Baloch succeeded his uncle. Mir Dost Muhammed consolidates his power and even then in year 1920 he proclaimed himself as �;;;Shah-e-Balochistan�;;; (King of Balochistan). Sadly his attempts to further strengthen his power coincided with the rise of Reza Khan to power in Persia.
In the fatal year of 1928 the Persian forces began the annexation operation against Baloch forces, the battle continued for seven months and ended with the victory of the enemy over Baloch forces. The defeat of Baloch forces under the command of Mir Dost Muhammed Khan resulted in his capture. In year 1928 in a Tehran jail Mir Dost Muhammed Baloch was executed and Western Balochistan was finally annexed by the Persian Forces.
The defeat of Baloch forces and the execution of Mir Dost Muhammed Khan Baloch in 1928 by the Persian army symbolizes the annexation of Western Balochistan in Baloch history. Until the Shah's overthrow in 1979, the Baloch Nationalist Movement in Iran was a relatively insignificant force compared to the movement in Eastern or Pakistani Balochistan.
Due to suppression, the harsh methods that were used by Iranian security forces and persecution by SAVAC (the Iranian security secret police under the Shah), its leaders were forced to emigrate and operate underground from foreign countries. They had little ongoing contact with their widely scattered supporters inside Iran. Nevertheless, while it never amounted to much in organisational terms, the pre- 1979 nationalist movement proved to have great psychological importance.
The handful of Baloch activists who braved the Shah�;;;s repression kept alive the spirit of resistance to Persian domination and thus directly set the stage for the resurgence of nationalist activities that took place after the overthrow of the Shah. A new political force emerged in Balochistan alongside traditional leaders comprising mostly of the educated young people. First they attempted to organise themselves but lack of political experience and ideological divisions soon disintegrated political workers into different political groupings, lessening their political importance.
Current Situation
In the Iranian controlled part of Balochistan, the Baloch are rapidly losing their identity. The previously Baloch-dominated regions of Bandar Abbas, part of Kerman, Seistan and Zabol are the most affected areas of the assimilation policy and efforts by the Persian state. Now in all these areas Balochs are a minority, even the capital city Dozzaap (Zahidan) does not look like a Baloch city. Balochs in Iran are completely excluded from the main structure of the political, social and economic establishments of the country.
The dissemination of Balochi culture and language is a declared act of treason against the state and is dealt with through brutal measures. Many army garrisons are permanently stationed in Baloch areas.
For most of the fifty years of Pahlavi rule, Tehran had to depend primarily on the use of overt military force to keep the Baloch areas under control, even when there was little co-ordinated insurgent activity. Mahmoud Khalatbary, who served as Director General of the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), in a discussion with Selig S. Harrison (author of book �;;;Baloch Nationalism and Soviet Temptations�;;;) recalled that: In CENTO, we always assumed that the Baloch would attempt to create their own independent state some day with Soviet support. So it was desirable to keep them as politically weak, disunited, and backward as possible.
This policy was implemented in practice so that in the last years of the Shah�;;;s regime Balochistan was the poorest province �;;;with an estimated annual per capita income of $975, less than half of the $2200 national average for rural areas and less than one-fifth of the overall national average. Balochistan is still the poorest province in Iran, followed by Kurdistan. The demise of the Palavi dynasty and establishment of the Islamic Republic have not brought about any positive changes to the situation of the Baloch people, but rather have worsened the oppression.
Baloch people in Iran are treated as third class citizens, and are deprived of their cultural, social and economic rights.
Some highlights of Iranian government's chauvinistic policies are:
1) The use of the Balochi language is forbidden in public places and Baloch children are deprived of using their mother tongue as the medium of instruction at school. The Iranian government does not allow any kind of freedom of press in Balochistan.
2) Successive Iranian governments have been engaged in demographic manipulations to systematically reduce the population of Baloch people to a minority in their own homeland.
3) Government policy has been based on giving easy access and facilities to non-Baloch to purchase land at a cheap price and set up businesses.
4) The policy of keeping the Baloch backward has resulted in the lack of job opportunities and impoverishment of the entire Baloch population.
There is no Baloch representation in the central government in Tehran e.g. minister or even a Baloch deputy. The high ranking officials and decision makers in Balochistan are outsider or non-Baloch locals who have been helped to migrate from other areas. The successive Iranian regimes have never trusted Baloch even those who are willing to voluntarily corporate with the regime�;;;s own conditions to represent Baloch in some high post.
5) The policy of Iranian governments in dealing with different sectors of Baloch society is based on �;;;divide and rule�;;;. Baloch society traditionally is tribal and feudal. The Shah based its policies on using these different rival tribes or feudal families to keep its hold over Baloch society without giving any attention to the Baloch majority�;;;s aspiration for social, economic and political justice. The Islamic regime of the ayatollahs, in addition plays the religious card, by dividing religious leaders and using them for its own purposes.
6) Women in Iran are in general considered second class citizens and not treated equally to men in any aspect of life. Baloch women are in a worse situation than their Persian and Shiite sisters because of national and religious differences. The Baloch are mostly Sunni Muslims. Iranian law does not give Baloch women adequate protection. Protection that is provided by the tribal system and Baloch tradition is not enough to give women their due share and equal right to participate in the development of a modern society, so women are the poorest segment in the Baloch society, suffering from gender, national and class discrimination and oppression.
7) The politic of the Iranian Government in Balochistan is characterised by human rights abuses. It has distorted political, economical and cultural development of Balochistan and insulted the human dignity of Baloch people. Balochs are discontent because they have not been allowed the right to use their native Balochi language. Balochs are disenchanted, as they do not receive any benefits from the resources found in their homeland.
They are disillusioned because of their economical exploitation that in the process are kept away from the power structure of the state. Balochs are disappointed because of religion manifestation, which used as a mean to assimilate Baloch nationality into Persian national identity in Iran. These basic realities have reinforced and frustrated Baloch�;;;s general feelings.
Literature
Selig S. Harrison, In Afghanistan�;;;s Shadow: Baloch Nationalism and Soviet Temptations, Carnegie Endowment for Peace, New York 1981.
Shahid Fiaz, Peace Audit Report 3, The Peace Question in Balochistan, South Asia Forum for Human Rights, Katmandu 2003.
Inayatullah Baloch, 1987, the Problem of Greater Balochistan, Stener Verlag Wiesbaden GMBH Stuttgart.
Khan, Mir Ahmad Yar Khan, Inside Balochsitan, Maaref Printers Karachi, 1975.
Ahmad Ali Khan Waxir, Tarikh Kerman, p 65-66-, (In Persian).
Farhang- e Iran Zamin, Compiled and edited by: Iraj Afshar, Tehran 1990.
Dr Naseer Dashti, Baloch in Iran: What Option they have
Population: 19 - 15 million of which about 4.4 million in Iran   |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Baluch nationalism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baluch nationalism, since its birth
Baluch nationalism, since its birth, has faced the problem of "international" frontiers which divide the Baluch among countries - Pakistan, Iran/and Afghanistan. The genesis of the problem pre-dates the Perso-Baluch (1871 and 1895-1905), 4 Seistan (1872-1896)(and Baluch-Afghan (1895) frontiers. The demarcation of these frontiers made the problem more acute and protracted it so that^ with the rise of Baluch nationalism in 193O, the Baluch were divided between Iran, Afghanistan and what was then British India. For obvious reasons, Pakistan and Iran had a common interest in suppressing the Baluch claim of self-determination and they have adopted a joint policy for this purpose. Afghanistan did not share the Iranian and Pakistan policies but stated its own claim for Baluchistan, as part of its demand for Pushtunistan. The Baluch-Afghan line as an international border is disputed by the Afghans, who regard the frontier with Pakistan as drawn by the British and agreed to by the Afghans only under duress.
To understand the complexity of the issue involved in the division of Baluchistan, it is important to have some understanding of the historical circumstances involved. The strategic position of Baluchistan, Iran, and Afghanistan in terms of commanding the principal trade routes between South-West Asia, Central Asia, and South Asia became important for Britain and Russia in the context of the geopolitical expansion of the two empires in Asia during the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th. In 1854, Britain entered into a treaty with the Khan, ruler of Baluchistan, in order to defend its territories against an external invasion from Central Asia and Iran. At the same time the Iranian rulers, who had lost their northern provinces to the Russians, pursued a policy of expansion towards Baluchistan in order to compensate for the lost areas. However, in 187O,the British Government agreed to demarcate the border with the Khanate of Baluchistan. In 1871, the British Government accepted the Iranian proposal and appointed Maj. General Gold-smid as Chief Commissioner of the joint Perso-Baluch Boundary Commission, Iran was represented by Mirza Ibrahim, and the Khanate of Baluchistan was represented by Sardar Faqir Muhammad Bizenjo, the Governor of Makran, The Baluch delegate submitted a claim for Western Baluchistan and Iranians claimed most of Makran including Kohuk. After several months of negotiations, Goldsmid divided Baluchistan into two parts without taking into consideration history, geography, culture or religion, and ignoring the statements of Baluch chiefs^ho regarded themselves as subjects of the Khan. Goldsmid's decision was based on political considerations. He aimed to please Iran in order to keep Iran away from Russia.
The Kohuk dispute; Kohuk is situated on the Perso-Baluch line. In 1871, General Goldsmid assigned Kohuk to the Khanate of Baluchistan on the following bases:
1. That the chief of Kohuk stated that he considered himself a feudatory of the
Khan.
2. That the Persian Commissioner, Ibrahim, refused to investigate the merits of
the question.
The Iranian government finally agreed to the decision in a letter dated September 4, 1871, but in a separate note to Allison (the British Minister at Tehran) "on the same day requested that, on consideration, a small portion of territory, including Kohuk, Isfunda and Kunabasta, would be made over to Persia." The question was referred to the Government of British India and General Goldsmid was consulted. Goldsmid changed his view and favoured the transfer to Iran because "it would make a far more compact and better boundary for Persian than for Khelat territory." At the same time, British India did not deem it necessary to justify declaring that territories which were not legally part of it should belong to Iran. Consequently, the British Government decided to prepare an amended map and to exclude Kohuk and other villages from the Khan's territory in order to give Iran the opportunity to occupy the area. An amended note and map were then sent to Tehran. In the amended note the districts of Kohuk, Isfunda,and Kunabasta were excluded from the Khanate of Baluchistan. When the decision to exclude this area from Baluchistan was conveyed to the Khan, he protested against the amended decision. The Khan was informed that the question was not definitely settled, as in April 1873, the Iranian government had refused to accept the
note. It does not appear to have been necessary to take any further account of his objections. In the late 19th century, the Iranians practically settled the question of Kohuk by military occupation and continued their policy of expansion in pushing their claim and their raids further and further into the Khanate. In 1896 and 1905, an Anglo-Persian Joint Boundary Commission was appointed to divide Baluchistan between Iran and Britain. During the process of demarcation of the frontier, several areas of the Khanate of Baluchistan were surrendered by the British authorities, who were hoping to please the Iranian government in order to check
the Russian influence in Iran. The frontier imposed by two alien powers on the Baluch people was demarcated without the consent of Kalat. The agreement of 1896 was a clear violation of the treaties of (the agreement) 1854 and 1876, declaring the Perso-Baluch line to be the frontier of Iran and India. It is interesting to note that the border demarcated by General Gold-smid was between the independent Khanate and Iran. The agreements of 1896 and 19O5 show a clear shift in British policy towards the Khanate; it was treated now as an Indian state. Under the treaty of 19O5, the Khanate lost the territory Of Mir Jawa and in return the Iranian government agreed that this frontier should be regarded as definitely settled in accordance with the agreement of 1896 and that no further claim should be made in respect of it. In 1872, the British government appointed General Goldsmid to settle the dispute over Seistan between Iran and Afghanistan. The dispute, however, was ended with the partition of Seistan between Iran and Afghanistan without the consent of the Baluch people. Ethnically, culturally, and geographically, Seistan is part of Baluchistan. Seistan ruled by Sanjrani chiefs was the vassal of the Khanate until 1882. A secret diary prepared by the British representative at Kalat on April 2o, 1872, to the British Government of India suggests that Sardar Ibrahim Khan Sanjrani of Chakansur (Seistan) acted as a vassal of the Khanate. Sir Robert Sandeman, in the letters to Lord Curzon dated November 22, 1891 and January 12, 1892, described the western limits of the Khanate as Hassanabad Q (Irani-Seistan) and the Halmand river near Rudbar. The final demarcation of Seistan took place in 19O4 by the British Commissioner, Sir McMahon, but the historical right of the Khanate and the principle of the right to self-determination were ignored. Sanjrani, chief of Chakansur, refused to acknowledge the Afghan rule under Amif Abdul Rahman. Nonetheless, the Kabul policy of British India encouraged Abdul Rahman to occupy the country. Nothing is known about the reaction of Mir Khudadad Khan, the ruler of Baluchistan.
The Baluch-Afghan or MoMahon Line: This covers an area from New Chaman to the Perso-Baluch border. The boundary was demarcated by the Indo-Afghan Boundary Commission headed by Capt. (later Sir) A. Henry McMahon in 1896. The boundary runs through the Baluch country, dividing one family from another and one tribe from another. As in the demarcation of the Perso-Baluch Frontier, the Khan was not consulted by the British, making the validity of the line doubtful, because:
1. The Goldsmid Line (the southern part of the Perso-Baluch Frontier) was imposed on the Khan by the British Government in 1871.
2. In 1896, when the rest of the Perso-Baluch Frontier was demarcated, the Khan ate, an independent state, was not consulted.
3. The partition of Seistan was unjust because Seistan was autonomous and the majority of the population, which was Baluch, recognized the Khan as their suzerain. The Sanjrani chief of Chakansur (Seistan) refused to accept Afghan rule in 1882.
4. The British reports clearly suggest that the Baluch people resented the rule of Iran and desired to accept, the status of a British protectorate against Iranian rule.
5. The partition of Baluchistan took place without taking into consideration the
4 factors of geography, culture, history, and the will of the people. However, the final outcome of the boundary settlements imposed on the Baluch was:
1. Seistan and Western Makran, Sarhad, etc. became part of Iran.
2. Outer Seistan and Registan came under the control of Afghanistan.
3. Jacobabad, Derajat and Sibi were included in British India.
4. The Khanate of Baluchistan was recognized as an independent state with status of a protectorate.
Nevertheless, Baluch tribes in the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century showed their hatred of the unnatural and unjust partition through their revolts against British and Persian rule. Gul Khan, a nationalist writer, wrote: "Due to the decisions of (boundary) Commissions more than half of the territory of Baluchistan came under the possession of Iran and less than half of it was given to Afghanistan. The factor for the division of a lordless Baluchistan was to please and control Iran and Afghanistan governments against Russia" in favour of Britain. In 1932, the Baluch Conference of Jacobabad voiced itself
against the Iranian occupation of Western Baluchistan. in 1933, Mir Abdul 'Aziz Kurd, a prominent national leader of Baluchistan, showed his opposition to the partition and division of Baluchistan by publishing the first map of Greater Baluchistan. In 1934, Magassi, the head of the Baluch national movement, suggested an armed struggle for the liberation and unification of Baluchistan. However, it was a difficult task because of its division into several parts, each part with a different constitutional and political status
Partition of Balochistan
"Divide And Rule" A famous quote of the Oppressors
Baluch nationalism, since its birth, has faced the problem of "International" frontiers which divide the Baluch among countries -- Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan. The genesis of the problem pre-dates the Perso-Baluch (1871 and 1895-1905), Seistan (1872-1896), and Baluch-Afghan (1895) frontiers. The demarcation of these frontiers made the problem more acute and protracted it so that, with the rise of Baluch nationalism in 1930, the Baluch were divided between Iran, Afghanistan, and what was the British India.
For obvious reasons, Pakistan and Iran had a common interest in suppressing the Baluch claim of self-determination and they have adopted a joint policy for this purpose. Afghanistan did not share the Iranian and the Pakistan policies but stated its own claim for Baluchistan, as part of its demand for Pushtunistan. The Baluch-Afghan line as an internaional border is disputed by the Afghans, who regard the frontier with Pakistan as drawn by the British and agreed to by the Afghans only under duress.
To understand the complexity of the issue involved in the division of Baluchistan, it is important to have some understanding of the historical circumstances involved. The strategic position of Baluchistan, Iran, and Afghanistan in terms of commanding the principal trade routes between South-West Asia, Central Asia, and South Asia became important for Britain and Russia in the context of the geopolitical expansion of the two empires in Asia during the 19th century and the begining of the 20th.
In 1854, Britain entered into a treaty with the Khan, ruler of Baluchistan, in order to defend its territories against an external invasion from Central Asia, and Iran. At the same time the Iranian rulers, who had lost their northern provinces to the Russians, pursued a policy of expansion towards Baluchistan in order to compensate for the lost areas. However, in 1870, the British Government agreed to demarcate the border with the Khanate of Baluchistan, In 1871, the British Government accepted the Iranian proposal and appointed Maj. General Goldsmid as Chief Commissioner of the joint Perso-Baluch Boundry Commission. Iran was represented by Mirza Ibrahim, and the Khanate of Baluchistan was represented by Sardar Faqir Muhammad Bizenjo, the Governor of Makran.
The Baluch delegate submitted a claim for Western Baluchistan and Iranians claimed most of Makran including Kohuk. After several months of negotiations, Goldsmid divided Baluchistan into two parts without taking into consideration, history, geography, culture or religion, and ignoring the statements of Baluch chiefs, who regarded themselves as subjects of the Khan. Goldsmid's decision was based on political considerations. He aimed to please Iran in order to keep Iran away from Russia.
Source: The Problem of Greater Balochistan, written by: Innayatullah Baloch |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
The Baloch are the indigenous people of Balochistan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike the universally agreed and long-established historical facts about the characteristics of the Baloch, the actual origin of the Baloch remains a matter of debate. Where did the Baloch come from? , or they did not! Research scholars have different opinions and theories about the origin of the Baloch. Lets outline the three serious existing theories about the origin of the Baloch: |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
1-The Baloch came from the Caspian Sea region |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Baloch came from the Caspian Sea region:
Some say they belong to the northern regions of Elburz and east of Caspian Sea, now inhabited by Ashkanis, originally Aryans. They believe that the Baloch and the Kurds are of Aryan origin and the true Iranian. Although scholars such as Sir Richard Burton and Professor Keane were of the same opinion, this theory is more acceptable to the Persian for some reasons. They refer to the Balochi language as a very strong evidence for their claim. Moreover, people of Baloch origin who speak Baloch still live in Turkamenstan and around that area. The opponents of this theory believe that those Baloch have migrated from Balochistan more recently than it could be attributed to the migration of Baloch. They claim that the first Baloch migration from the Caspian See region, most probably around 1200 B.C., must have been motivated by this general historical phenomenon. They first settled in northern Persia. They cling to the authority of Persian poet, Firdousi (935-1020 A.D.) and also strong historical evidences that the Baloch were a political and military force during the times of Cyrus and Combyses. However, the Baloch movement from Kirman and Seisran to Makoran and then Eastern Balochistan was not the only result of the lack of sufficient productive forces to meet their demands, or insufficient grazing fields for their flocks, because the area they migrated to was no better in natural resources than the area in which they had been settled for centuries. The main reason was their conflict with rulers and their own internal enmity which resulted in a weakening of their political position. yet another factor most probably was the Mongolian invasion of Central Asia and the subsequent political anarchy in the whole region. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
2-The Baloch are the indigenous people of Balochistan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Baloch are the indigenous people of Balochistan : Some researchers hold the opinion that the Baloch are the original cave-dewellers and hunters of Balochistan who created the first civilisation of the World aound Mehergarh. They regard the Baloch as the remnants of indigenous population of the area. They refer to the fact that the Baloch are neither related to the Persian nor to the Punjabis or Pathans, while at the same time they have racial and linguistic affinity to both sides. These theory is supported by Baloch Nationalists for obvious reasons. |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
3-The Baloch came from Halab (Allepe) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some historians maintain that they came from Halab, Allepe, and are Semites. It is also believed that they from the old stock of Sumerians of Mesopotamia. The historians, however, mostly concern themselves in tracing the Baloch racical origin either from among the Indo-Europeans or the Semites. Neither should one object on these methods for historical research, nor doubt the fact that there had been an admixture of various people with Baloch like the Scythians, Pathians, Ashkanis, Sakas, Kushans, Huns, Turks and many others; nor contest the proposition that Baloch, culturally, were greatly influenced by Tigris-Euphrates civilization at different stages of history. Subscribers to this school of thought believe that the Baloch and Kurds were two large tribes of common origin. For whatever reasons, the Kurds decided to move towards the East by hundereds of kilometers only, while the Baloch moved thousands of kilometers eastward. This theory might prove the most accurate. Apart from historical evidence and academic debates, there are certain sceintific markers which makes this theory more plausible than the other two. These sceintific markers are the prevelance of certain genetic diseases such as Glucose 6 Phosphate Dehydrogenase Deficiency ( Favism) and Thalaseamia. According to the World Health Organisation (WHO) The Baloch have the same occurance rate as the Kurds, Iraqis, original Syrians and the Khuzestanis of Iran. The occurance rate of the Baloch is very different from Punjabis, Sindis and Pathans. Surely science can shed some lights where history fails to illuminate |
|
|
|
Today, there have been 18 visitors (25 hits) on this page! |