AIRLINK 153.32 Decreased By ▼ -2.80 (-1.79%)
BOP 9.79 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-2.2%)
CNERGY 7.09 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.57%)
CPHL 81.71 Decreased By ▼ -2.42 (-2.88%)
FCCL 44.04 Decreased By ▼ -0.61 (-1.37%)
FFL 14.63 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-1.75%)
FLYNG 36.67 Increased By ▲ 3.33 (9.99%)
HUBC 133.47 Decreased By ▼ -2.08 (-1.53%)
HUMNL 12.85 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.23%)
KEL 4.38 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (5.29%)
KOSM 5.42 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (6.9%)
MLCF 70.20 Decreased By ▼ -1.40 (-1.96%)
OGDC 202.93 Increased By ▲ 2.71 (1.35%)
PACE 5.09 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.79%)
PAEL 43.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.79 (-1.8%)
PIAHCLA 16.47 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-1.61%)
PIBTL 8.82 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.26%)
POWER 14.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.51 (-3.42%)
PPL 151.80 Increased By ▲ 3.32 (2.24%)
PRL 29.52 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.1%)
PTC 20.39 Decreased By ▼ -0.46 (-2.21%)
SEARL 81.51 Decreased By ▼ -1.96 (-2.35%)
SSGC 36.08 Decreased By ▼ -3.95 (-9.87%)
SYM 14.58 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-2.02%)
TELE 7.01 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.29%)
TPLP 8.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.72%)
TRG 64.08 Increased By ▲ 0.45 (0.71%)
WAVESAPP 9.64 Increased By ▲ 0.77 (8.68%)
WTL 1.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.75%)
YOUW 3.65 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (5.49%)
AIRLINK 153.32 Decreased By ▼ -2.80 (-1.79%)
BOP 9.79 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-2.2%)
CNERGY 7.09 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.57%)
CPHL 81.71 Decreased By ▼ -2.42 (-2.88%)
FCCL 44.04 Decreased By ▼ -0.61 (-1.37%)
FFL 14.63 Decreased By ▼ -0.26 (-1.75%)
FLYNG 36.67 Increased By ▲ 3.33 (9.99%)
HUBC 133.47 Decreased By ▼ -2.08 (-1.53%)
HUMNL 12.85 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.23%)
KEL 4.38 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (5.29%)
KOSM 5.42 Increased By ▲ 0.35 (6.9%)
MLCF 70.20 Decreased By ▼ -1.40 (-1.96%)
OGDC 202.93 Increased By ▲ 2.71 (1.35%)
PACE 5.09 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.79%)
PAEL 43.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.79 (-1.8%)
PIAHCLA 16.47 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-1.61%)
PIBTL 8.82 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.26%)
POWER 14.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.51 (-3.42%)
PPL 151.80 Increased By ▲ 3.32 (2.24%)
PRL 29.52 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.1%)
PTC 20.39 Decreased By ▼ -0.46 (-2.21%)
SEARL 81.51 Decreased By ▼ -1.96 (-2.35%)
SSGC 36.08 Decreased By ▼ -3.95 (-9.87%)
SYM 14.58 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-2.02%)
TELE 7.01 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (0.29%)
TPLP 8.32 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.72%)
TRG 64.08 Increased By ▲ 0.45 (0.71%)
WAVESAPP 9.64 Increased By ▲ 0.77 (8.68%)
WTL 1.33 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.75%)
YOUW 3.65 Increased By ▲ 0.19 (5.49%)
BR100 12,110 Decreased By -38.6 (-0.32%)
BR30 35,339 Decreased By -55.1 (-0.16%)
KSE100 113,569 Decreased By -533.7 (-0.47%)
KSE30 34,681 Decreased By -127.9 (-0.37%)

This is apropos a letter to the Editor titled ‘Xinjiang, Balochistan and FATA’ to the Editor carried by this newspaper yesterday.

In my view, to counter the Baloch insurgency and integrate the Baloch people into the national mainstream, the government only had to adopt a holistic approach to address the root causes of the conflict, including economic marginalization, political exclusion, and cultural grievances by investing in local development, ensuring fair resource distribution, and enhancing political representation while granting greater administrative autonomy to Balochistan.

On the contrary, the government response to deal with insurgency in Balochistan is normally perceived exactly the opposite.

The propaganda war has inculcated the impression albeit without any conclusive evidence that the response of Pakistan’s government included military operations, targeted killings, enforced disappearances.

The media is rife with reports that tens of thousands of people, including insurgents, civilians, and security personnel, have been killed in the ongoing conflict making this conflict as one of Pakistan’s deadliest.

Similarly the response of the Government to erstwhile FATA is perceived primarily kinetic. Reportedly, the Pakistani government has conducted numerous military operations (e.g., Operation Zarb-e-Azb) to dismantle militant networks. The insurgency and counter-insurgency operations have led to tens of thousands of deaths, including militants, security forces, and civilians.

Displacement and destruction of infrastructure have also been significant. Contrastingly, in Xinjiang, the Chinese government primarily pursued the policy of development which worked like magic.

The region has purposefully made a lynchpin of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). During the 13th Five-Year Plan period (2016-2020), China invested over $100 billion in Xinjiang’s development.

The substantial investment has also been made in infrastructure, industry, IT, and modern agriculture, as part of its broader strategy to integrate the region more closely with the rest of the country and to address the underlying economic disparities that contribute to unrest.

Qamar Bashir

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024

Comments

Comments are closed.