ONE of the worst escalations in Balochistan’s long-running insurgency has occurred over the past week. Between July 4 and 8, coordinated attacks across the province claimed the lives of 42 civilians and security personnel. The brutality was staggering: 18 abducted police officers executed, 11 soldiers ambushed on the N-25 highway and nine policemen martyred in Ziarat. Security forces responded by eliminating 54 militants, with the toll later rising to 75. Yet these numbers tell only part of a far more troubling story.
Pakistan’s security challenges are not confined to Balochistan. Cross-border infiltration persists along the western border, the eastern frontier remains a conventional concern and sectarian networks continue to mobilize. This diffusion of effort is not sustainable. When Balochistan accounts for nearly 44 percent of Pakistan’s landmass, possesses enormous mineral wealth, hosts Gwadar Port, the centrepiece of CPEC and borders both Afghanistan and Iran, instability here carries consequences that extend far beyond internal security. Pakistan must treat Balochistan not as one among many problems, but as the primary existential challenge requiring immediate attention.
The deterioration has been alarming. The frequency of attacks has increased, but so has their sophistication. External factors are clearly at play. Pakistan’s military leadership has presented evidence that India provides financial and logistical support to the BLA. Most of the terrorists killed were Afghan nationals, according to the DG ISPR, who also claimed that the Afghan Taliban regime is providing manpower. Coordinated attacks and the recovery of high-tech weapons are hallmarks of an insurgency funded from outside sources.
The mineral dimension makes this even more consequential. Balochistan possesses some of the world’s most promising undeveloped deposits of copper, gold, chromite and potentially rare earth elements. With China dominating the world’s rare earth processing industry, the US is seeking to diversify its supply chains and has pledged nearly $1.25 billion to the Reko Diq project. This competition among the great powers has turned Balochistan into a strategic prize, with outside actors prepared to fuel instability to gain leverage. Yet external interference alone does not explain the conflict. There are genuine grievances that require genuine responses. We overlooked the small smoke and now it has become a raging fire. Is this purely a separatist movement ignited from outside or is it a fight for a fair share of resources? The truth is that it is both and until we address the indigenous grievances, the external fuel will continue to ignite.
Perhaps the most disturbing development is the increasing involvement of women. The BLA has released videos showing female fighters training and participating in operations. A woman commander has declared that Baloch women will no longer be “soft targets”. Security operations have intercepted cases where vulnerable females are radicalized and deployed for suicide bombings. Many come from educated, middle-class backgrounds, suggesting recruitment through online platforms. This is not just a security problem; it reflects deep-seated alienation. We must ask: what draws them to the BLA? This is propaganda regarding deprivation and imbalanced development in the province, which is not true; it also paints the state as an occupying force. Unless we address these factors, female recruitment will only grow.
The brutal killings of recent weeks have led many to ask: have we passed the time for negotiation? Is it now time for an all-out clearance? Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has vowed that operations will continue until the menace is completely eradicated. Yet an All Parties Conference called for resolving challenges through political dialogue rather than the “use of force”. Balochistan Minister Mir Sadiq Umrani has stated that “dialogue is the only solution”. The truth is that both approaches are necessary, but they must be sequenced strategically. Military action remains indispensable for dismantling terror networks, but force alone will not secure lasting peace. We have to weigh whether we can take on a full-scale military campaign in Balochistan at this time, given our other fronts. Or should we pursue negotiation while maintaining military pressure to bring ourselves to a position of advantage? The latter seems more prudent. To solve this crisis, we must prioritize Balochistan over all other security challenges and it is more important now than ever to ensure energy security and make Pakistan a transit and transhipment hub.
We must distinguish between those who participate in constitutional politics and those who wage armed insurgency, engaging mainstream nationalist leaders through dialogue. We must address genuine grievances through meaningful negotiations and remain open and flexible in discussing and finding solutions. We must counter female radicalization by active engagement and true analysis and not shy away from the root cause. We must continue robust kinetic operations while simultaneously opening channels for political dialogue with non-violent stakeholders. The soldiers of Pakistan have done their duty and sacrificed multiple times more. It is now time for the state to do its own, have a national consensus, engage the true tribal leaders and read history to learn how the British did it; surely we will find a solution. Balochistan does not need patience for those who execute bus passengers by their identity cards. It needs investment, security and genuine inclusion to outpace the militants for good. The next chapter will be written not by militants alone, but by the choices Pakistan’s leaders make today.
—The writer is an international law expert and an internationally accredited arbitrator and mediator.
