How Pakistan Illegally Annexed Balocistan.

[Malcolm Merlyn]

Quote

Balochistan consists of the south west of Pakistan. In the west it borders with Afghanistan and Iran and in the south it has the Arabian Sea. It accounts for nearly half the land mass of Pakistan and only 3.6% of its total population. The province is immensely rich in natural resources, including oil, gas, copper and gold. Despite these huge deposits of mineral wealth, the area is one of the poorest regions of Pakistan. A vast majority of its population lives in deplorable housing conditions where they don’t have access to electricity or clean drinking water. Before the partition of India and Pakistan, Balochistan consisted of four princely states under the British Raj. These were Kalat, Lasbela, Kharan and Makran. Two of these provinces, Lasbela and Kharan, were fiduciary states placed under Khan of Kalat's rule by the British, as was Makran which was a district of Kalat. Three months before the formation of Pakistan, Muhammed Ali Jinnah had negotiated the freedom of Baluchistan under Kalat from the British. Discussions were made about Kalat's relationship with Pakistan as it was formed. This ensued a series of meetings between the Viceroy, as the Crown’s Representative, Jinnah and the Khan of Kalat. This resulted in a communique on August 11, 1947, which stated that: a. The Government of Pakistan recognizes Kalat as an independent sovereign state in treaty relations with the British Government with a status different from that of Indian States. b. Legal opinion will be sought as to whether or not agreements of leases will be inherited by the Pakistan Government. c. Meanwhile, a Standstill Agreement has been made between Pakistan and Kalat. d. Discussions will take place between Pakistan and Kalat at Karachi at an early date with a view to reaching decisions on Defence, External Affairs and Communications.

 

Referring to a telegram of October 17, 1947 from Grafftey-Smith, the Political Department, in a note on Pakistan-Kalat negotiations, says that Jinnah had second thoughts regarding the recognition of Kalat as an independent sovereign state, and was now desirous of obtaining its accession in the same form as was accepted by other rulers who joined Pakistan. The same note mentioned that an interesting situation is developing as Pakistan might accept the accession of Kalat’s two feudatories, Lasbela and Kharan.
By October 1947, Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah had a change of heart on the recognition of Kalat as an “Independent and a Sovereign State”, and wanted the Khan to sign the same form of instrument of accession as the other states which had joined Pakistan. The Khan was unwilling to abandon the nominally achieved independent status but ready to concede on defence, foreign affairs and communications. However, he was unwilling to sign either a treaty or an Instrument, until and unless he had got a satisfactory agreement on the leased areas. Fears were also being voiced that officials of the Government of Pakistan might start dealing with the two feudatories of Las Bela and Kharan, and accept their de facto accession.

Quote

By February 1948, the discussions between Kalat and the Government of Pakistan were coming to a head. The Quaid wrote to the Khan of Kalat: “I advise you to join Pakistan without further delay…and let me have your final reply which you promised to do after your stay with me in Karachi when we fully discussed the whole question in all its aspects.” On February 15, 1948, Jinnah visited Sibi, Baluchistan and addressed a Royal Durbar, where he announced that until the Pakistan Constitution is finally written in about two years’ time, he would govern the province with the help of an advisory council that he would nominate. However, the main reason for Jinnah’s visit was to persuade the Khan of Kalat to accede to Pakistan. As it transpired, the Khan failed to turn up for the final meeting with him, pleading illness. In his letter to Jinnah, he said that he had summoned both Houses of the Parliament, Dar-ul-Umara and Dar-ul-Awam, for their opinion about the future relations with the Dominion of Pakistan, and he would inform him about their opinion by the end of the month.

Quote

When the Dar-ul-Awam of Kalat met on February 21, 1948, it decided not to accede, but to negotiate a treaty to determine Kalat’s future relations with Pakistan. On March 9, 1948 the Khan received communication from JInnah announcing that he had decided not to deal personally with the Kalat state negotiations, which would henceforth be dealt with by the Pakistan Government. So far there had not been any formal negotiations but only an informal request made by Jinnah to the Khan at Sibi.

The US Ambassador to Pakistan in his dispatch home on March 23, 1948 informed that on March 18, “Kharan, Lasbela and Mekran, feudatory states of Kalat” had acceded to Pakistan. The Khan of Kalat objected to their accession, arguing that it was a violation of Kalat’s Standstill Agreement with Pakistan. He also said that while Kharan and Lasbela were its feudatories, Mekran was a district of Kalat. The British Government had placed the control of the foreign policy of the two feudatories under Kalat in July 1947, prior to partition.

On March 26, 1948, the Pakistan Army was ordered to move into the Baloch coastal region of Pasni, Jiwani and Turbat. This was the first act of aggression prior to the march on Kalat by a Pakistani military detachment on April 1, 1948. Kalat capitulated on March 27 after the army moved into the coastal region and it was announced in Karachi that the Khan of Kalat has agreed to merge his state with Pakistan. Jinnah accepted this accession under the gun. It should be noted that the Balochistan Assembly had already rejected any suggestion of forfeiting the independence of Balochistan on any pretext. So even the signature of the Khan of Kalat taken under the barrel of the gun, was not viable, because the parliament had rejected the accession and the accession was never mandated by the British Empire either, who had given Balochistan under Kalat independence before India. The sovereign Baloch state after British withdrawal from India lasted only 227 days. During this time Baluchistan had a flag flying in its embassy in Karachi where its ambassador to Pakistan lived. To say that the Baloch have been ill-treated by all governments and military establishments since their land was illegally and forcefully taken over would be an understatement. As a result there have been continuous insurgencies, the largest of which was started in 2006 after the killing of Sardar Akber Bugti and 26 of his tribesmen by the Pakistan Army. A 2006 report by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) documented arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture, extra judicial and summary executions, disappearances and the use of excessive and indiscriminate violence by the Pakistan police, military, security agencies and intelligence forces. These figures are corroborated by Amnesty International. Kachkol Ali Baloch who is the former leader of Opposition in the Balochistan Assembly, alleged that about 4,000 people have been either missing or are detained without trial. The missing persons included around 1,000 students and political activists.  Lately his own son was kidnapped and was finally released after being held captive for 14 months. Sardar Akhter Mengal, leader of the Baloch Nationalist Party (BNP) was one of the people arrested in 2006 on framed terrorism charges. The reality was he was planning a long march against the then President of Pakistan General Pervez Musharraf. He was later released in 2008 and all cases against him were dropped. The current Chief Minister of Balochistan, Dr. Abdul Malik Baloch, recently spoke at a seminar held in Punjab called ‘Stability in Balochistan – Challenges and possibilities”. He clearly stated that if the Baloch people are not given a right to the resources of their province, we would be looking at yet another insurgency and no one will be able to control it.

The true history of Balochistan is never shared or talked about among the general public of Pakistan. Our textbooks and other publications narrate a rhetoric which is far from the truth, and which has made the general public believe in a lie. It is the responsibility of the intellectuals, the teachers and the professors to learn and reveal the real facts according to non-tempered historical documents.

 

http://nation.com.pk/blogs/05-Dec-2015/how-balochistan-became-a-part-of-pakistan-a-historical-perspective

 

Pakistanis are masters of violating agreements and forcefully trying to annexe territory.And they have the guts to talk about Kashmir.

[randomGuy]

We were only 50years late in rising against occupation.

 

Anyways 1971-Bangladesh, 2021-Baluchistan should be ensured now.

[chewy]

Annexation is of Balochistan is no secret, independence call for Balochistan has been going for decades, and Pak army undertaking ethnic cleansing for years there, it is same psycho army bombing it's civilian population elsewhere

[Adi_91]

And as always @KeyboardWarrior, is avoiding this thread and celebrating their success in carrying out another fidayeen attack. One of their specialty. 

[KeyboardWarrior]

@Adi_91 whts so special in this thread that i have to avoid it ? its a useless thread. 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

@Adi_91 whts so special in this thread that i have to avoid it ? its a useless thread. 

Yes, talking legal matters with Pakistanis is useless, since you guys are all epic fails in the field of law.

but 70+ years of lawlessness is going to create a society that doesnt understand or care for the law. 

[Adi_91]

2 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

@Adi_91 whts so special in this thread that i have to avoid it ? its a useless thread. 

You are useless, but we still have you here. Can't come with a decent comment also.

[KeyboardWarrior]

10 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Yes, talking legal matters with Pakistanis is useless, since you guys are all epic fails in the field of law.

but 70+ years of lawlessness is going to create a society that doesnt understand or care for the law. 

its "one" blogger's own pov. 

thats all its. 

10 hours ago, Adi_91 said:

You are useless, but we still have you here. Can't come with a decent comment also.

 Good going bro. 

[Muloghonto]

8 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

its "one" blogger's own pov. 

thats all its. 

 Good going bro. 

Legalism is about legal technicalities, not an 'opinion'. What this blogger is saying, is legally valid. But then again, as i said, i don't expect Pakistanis to understand legalism, since such a concept does not exist in your nation or syllabus of education. 

 

[Sajid_Rana]

All these decades India did not cared about Baluchistan but now with CPEC, Gwadar and chinese investments, Baluchistan seems to get their economy going and suddenly Indians care about Baluchistan more than their own farmers, women and Kashmiri youth. Why? India should be happy that with economic progress in Baluchistan youths will have jobs and less likely to be brainwashed to join jihad to liberate Kashmiris.

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, Sajid_Rana said:

All these decades India did not cared about Baluchistan but now with CPEC, Gwadar and chinese investments, Baluchistan seems to get their economy going and suddenly Indians care about Baluchistan more than their own farmers, women and Kashmiri youth. Why? India should be happy that with economic progress in Baluchistan youths will have jobs and less likely to be brainwashed to join jihad to liberate Kashmiris.

Because we will do to Baluchistan what you have been doing to Kashmir. Since that is the only language Paksitan and Pakistanis understand, whats not to understand ? We have Kashmir, who's sovereign legally acceded to Republic of India due to Pakistan's military assault on them. Despite this, Pakistan believes it has a claim on Kashmir. Well, you straight-up illegally occupied Baluchistan, so we can fan those flames, since you won't quit about Kashmir despite having no legal claim to it.

 

Your nation has shown us, that with money and effort, you can turn a peaceful state into a terrorist hell-hole. Well guess what ? lesson learnt and we have more money and manpower than you.....

 

[Adi_91]

2 minutes ago, Sajid_Rana said:

All these decades India did not cared about Baluchistan but now with CPEC, Gwadar and chinese investments, Baluchistan seems to get their economy going and suddenly Indians care about Baluchistan more than their own farmers, women and Kashmiri youth. Why? India should be happy that with economic progress in Baluchistan youths will have jobs and less likely to be brainwashed to join jihad to liberate Kashmiris.

Yeah, less likely to be brain washed by your terrorist leaders.

[KeyboardWarrior]

10 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Legalism is about legal technicalities, not an 'opinion'. What this blogger is saying, is legally valid. But then again, as i said, i don't expect Pakistanis to understand legalism, since such a concept does not exist in your nation or syllabus of education. 

 

arundhati roy also said about some same "legalism" and " legal technicalities" about IOK in past. 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

arundhati roy also said about some same "legalism" and " legal technicalities" about IOK in past. 

Except Arundhati Roy is not a lawyer, political analyst or a student of Political Science. Yogeena Veena is. See what i mean ? Pakistanis have no clue towards legalism, they think its just 'opinions'. Laughable!

 

[Adi_91]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

Except Arundhati Roy is not a lawyer, political analyst or a student of Political Science. Yogeena Veena is. See what i mean ? Pakistanis have no clue towards legalism, they think its just 'opinions'. Laughable!

 

We have more padosi clowns here who are making a mockery of their nation anyway.

[KeyboardWarrior]

10 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Except Arundhati Roy is not a lawyer, political analyst or a student of Political Science. Yogeena Veena is. See what i mean ? Pakistanis have no clue towards legalism, they think its just 'opinions'. Laughable!

 

as i said before you need to update about few issues. 

70+ yrs and you need Yogeena veena ji's article to fight your case for Balochistan ? 

Lawyer ....  

aik pather uthaoo, aesy 1000 lawyers miltay hain pakistan mein.

btw someone asked her if she gonna fight balochistan case on SC,  but she never replied back. dont know why.

[Muloghonto]

31 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

as i said before you need to update about few issues. 

70+ yrs and you need Yogeena veena ji's article to fight your case for Balochistan ? 

Lawyer ....  

aik pather uthaoo, aesy 1000 lawyers miltay hain pakistan mein.

btw someone asked her if she gonna fight balochistan case on SC,  but she never replied back. dont know why.

Yes, we know what type of lawyers we find in Pakistan, which is why i said you and your nation has zero understanding or respect for the law.

You proved your own ignorance by putting a political analyst's opinion on legalism on the same pedestal as a literary figure and architect. 

 

[KeyboardWarrior]

11 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Yes, we know what type of lawyers we find in Pakistan, which is why i said you and your nation has zero understanding or respect for the law.

You proved your own ignorance by putting a political analyst's opinion on legalism on the same pedestal as a literary figure and architect. 

 

you dont get my point uncle jee,

as i said before,  laywer or political analyst she is no one in pakistan. 

if she gt problem thn she should go to SC or UN. but she didnt. 

her article is like story telling.  "jinnah put the "Gun" on khan of kalat" ... r u kidding me ? 

70+ yrs and no one talks about it ? 

and the genius lawyer didnt even know that Balochistan territory wasnt the same like its now.

 

on the legal issue,

btw can you tell me was it "legal" to create mukti bahni ?   

Edited September 18, 2016 by KeyboardWarrior

[Adi_91]

2 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

you dont get my point uncle jee,

as i said before,  laywer or political analyst she is no one in pakistan. 

if she gt problem thn she should go to SC or UN. but she didnt. 

her article is like story telling.  "jinnah put the "Gun" on khan of kalat" ... r u kidding me ? 

70+ yrs and no one talks about it ? 

and the genius lawyer didnt even know that Balochistan territory wasnt the same like its now.

 

on the legal issue,

btw can you tell me was it "legal" to create mukti bahni ?   

Your country is a nothing country. I don't blame you for your ignorance and ranting. After all, thugs and terrorists rule you guys. 

 

Why not keep an election for voting the best terrorist leader in your country? Will be one heck of a "undemocratic" process that will suit your country's continuing legacy.

[Muloghonto]

8 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

you dont get my point uncle jee,

as i said before,  laywer or political analyst she is no one in pakistan. 

if she gt problem thn she should go to SC or UN. but she didnt. 

her article is like story telling.  "jinnah put the "Gun" on khan of kalat" ... r u kidding me ? 

70+ yrs and no one talks about it ? 

and the genius lawyer didnt even know that Balochistan territory wasnt the same like its now.

 

on the legal issue,

btw can you tell me was it "legal" to create mukti bahni ?   

SC of what ? Pakistan ? LOL. Your court system is a sham, which no multinational trusts, let alone other governments. This is why the MoUs in Pakistan require military signatures. 

 

70+ years and no-one talks about it- so what ? How many talk about Tiananmen Square massacre in China and its been nearly 30 years since it as well. 

But we are talking about it now. 

 

PS: We didn't create the Mukti Bahini. Mujibur Rahman created it, in Dhaka, at the Ramna Race course. We started supporting it and created an independent Bangladesh after Pakistan's army launched an illegal coup and genocide in Bangladesh, flooding our borders with refugees, then horribly lost a war against us when we intervened in the human crisis. 

Had you sealed your borders and not given us the massive refugee problem, we'd not have interfered in Bangladesh.