In Search of Solutions— Part 4

In Search of Solutions is the autobiography of leading Baloch nationalist leader Mir Ghose Baksh Bizenjo which was compiled by his political comrade B M Kutty. The Baloch Hal brings you the book chapter wise.

Taking advantage of the relatively less restrictive conditions in ‘British’ Baluchistan as compared to Kalat State, KSNP continued its activities from Quetta. In this effort KSNP received fraternal support from Anjuman-e-Watan and its leader Khan Abdus Samad Khan Achakzai. Anjuman-e-Watan was rapidly growing in strength and popularity, so much so that it had virtually become the ‘British’ Baluchistan chapter of the Indian National Congress. Abdus Samad Achakzai was held in high esteem by the Congress Party leadership in Delhi.

The Indian National Congress had its counterpart in the princely states of India in the shape of the All India State People’s Conference (AISPC). Jawaharlal Nehru was at that time the President of the Conference and Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah the Vice President. KSNP had got a fair amount of subcontinental projection through the sustained interaction of exiled comrades like Malik Abdurrahim Khwajakhel, Malik Faiz Muhammad and others with the print media outside Baluchistan. In mid-1945, AISPC formally accepted KSNP as one of its affiliate members, representing the State of Kalat. I was nominated by KSNP to represent the Party as a member of AISPC Working Committee.

The Kalat Administration and the British Political Agent had anticipated that after the expulsion of the KSNP leaders and activists from the State, the Party would gradually wither away. To their utter dismay, things turned out quite differently. From its erstwhile existence in isolation in Kalat State, KSNP soon propelled itself into the limelight of Indian subcontinent’s politics. The realization now dawned on them that it was a mistake to banish the KSNP leadership from the State. They decided not to extend the period of exile of the KSNP leaders. Thus, the exile which had started in 1939 ended in 1942.

However, wisdom was a bit too late in coming to the help of Kalat Administration and the British Political Agent. KSNP had by then become a component of a great All-India political institution and the nationalist movement of Kalat State had become linked with the freedom movement in the subcontinent.

The great divide in the Indian polity

British India was in the throes of a growing Hindu-Muslim estrangement. The All India Muslim League was asserting its claim to be the only representative political forum of the Muslims of India. Ironically, however, almost all the leading Muslim religious and religio-political groups and clerics in India refused to accept that claim. This fact was convincingly demonstrated in the 1937 general elections held under the 1935 Government of India Act. Out of 484 reserved Muslim seats in the 11 provinces, Muslim League could win only 108 as against 376 won by other Muslim groups and Congress.

On the other hand, the Indian National Congress, which claimed with a lot of justification to be a secular party, had not been able to command mass support among the Indian Muslims. This was despite the presence of eminent Muslim luminaries like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad among its top ranking leaders. The Muslim League in its bid to win over the Muslim masses resorted to all sorts of communalistic rhetoric. On the other hand, the traditionalist Hindu elements in the Congress, with their hard-line attitude towards religion, helped to further alienate the Muslims. In the process, the secular ethos of the Congress got diluted. The British on their part obviously had their own reasons to encourage the communalization of Indian politics.

After the Congress formed its ministries in 8 of the 11 provinces, the rivalry between it and the Muslim League came into the open. Hindu Muslim riots erupted in some of the Congress-ruled provinces like U.P., C.P., Bihar and Bombay, adding grist to the mill of Muslim League’s propaganda against the Congress and alienated it further from the Muslim community.

The outbreak of Second World War in September 1939 called for a reassessment of policies on all sides – British Indian Government, Indian National Congress and All India Muslim League. The Congress had to set aside its aggressive nationalist posture and content itself with calling for an assurance from Britain that independence would be granted to India as soon as the war-born emergency was over. The Muslim League, on the other hand, supported the war effort but at the same time demanded that no constitutional arrangement for India be made without its consent.

The British government chose to ignore the Congress demand. The Congress reacted by asking all its provincial ministries to resign in October 1939. In response to their resignation, the Muslim League observed ‘Deliverance Day’ on 22nd December 1939, further widening the gulf between the two major political forces of India. On the 23rd March 1940, the All India Muslim League in its National Council session held in Lahore demanded the status of ‘independent and sovereign’ states for the Muslim majority zones of India, the precursor to the demand for Pakistan.

In March 1942, the British Government sent the Cripps Mission to India with proposals for framing a new constitution. These proposals were eventually rejected both by the Congress and the Muslim league, though for different reasons. In August 1942, the All India Congress Committee (AICC) passed the famous Quit India resolution, threatening that if the British Government did not take steps towards quitting India as soon as possible, the Congress would launch a civil disobedience movement. The British responded by arresting Gandhiji and most members of the AICC. Congress was declared an unlawful organization. The Working Committee of the Muslim League in its meeting in August 1942 termed the AICC’s call for launching a civil disobedience movement an ‘open rebellion’ and called upon the Muslims to abstain from any kind of participation in such a movement.

Working with the AISPC

As mentioned earlier, I was associated with All India State Peoples’ Conference (AISPC) as the nominee of Kalat State National Party on its Working Committee. It gave me the opportunity to work with famous politicians of that time such as Jawaharlal Nehru, Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Bakhshi Ghulam Muhammad, Saifuddin Kichlu, Pattabhi Sitaramayya and several others. As a member of AISPC working committee, I also got an opportunity to revisit the famous cities of Jaipur and Jodhpur during its meetings held there in 1945-46. I had been to these cities earlier as a young member of a football team.1

1 Meanwhile, I had shifted from Shanak Jhao to my father’s ancestral village Nal in Khuzdar District in 1943. Two years later, in 1945, I married the sister of Sardar Faqir Muhammad Bizenjo, the present Sardar of the Bizenjo tribe. (This Bizenjo Sardar is not the one whom I have accused earlier of coveting my properties when I was still a young boy.)

An incident of that period is still fresh in my memory. Sheikh Abdullah was arrested by the Dogra Maharajah’s government of Kashmir for authoring a Quit Kashmir pamphlet and for disturbing peace. The Working Committee of AISPC meeting in Delhi decided to send Nehru to Kashmir. Nehru was ready but the Indian National Congress would not agree, citing the presence of Cripps Mission in India as the reason. Sardar Vallabhai Patel was among those who vehemently opposed Nehru’s visit to Kashmir at that juncture. Some Muslim members of the AISPC Working Committee thought that, had it been a Hindu who was arrested in place of the Muslim Sheikh Abdullah, Patel would not have been so insistent on opposing Nehru’s trip to Kashmir!

But Jawaharlal Nehru was made of stronger mettle. He questioned the Congress directive, arguing that his organization AISPC wanted him to go and he would go. And so he went. As anticipated, he was arrested as he stepped into Kashmir territory and was placed under detention in a rest house. Despite Nehru having defied its directive, the Congress reacted sharply to his arrest. A directive was issued to all the Congress Governments that if the Maharaja of Kashmir stepped on the territory of any of the provinces, he should be taken into custody. The Congress also decided against holding any talks with the Cripps Mission till Nehru was released.

The impending division of India

The British had managed to rule the vast subcontinent for so long by means of chicanery and deceit. One of their most effective weapons was the notorious policy of ‘divide and rule’. They had encouraged and sustained communal tensions, particularly between the two major religious communities of India, Hindus and Muslims. Muslims being in the minority were more prone to feelings of fear and insecurity. The Indian National Congress with all its nationalist and secular credentials had sadly failed to allay the fears of the majority of India’s Muslim population. As a result, the All India Muslim League had gradually emerged as the representative voice of the bulk of the Muslims of India. Muslim League’s 1940 Lahore Resolution had become their rallying cry.

The British were under mounting pressure to quit the subcontinent. The naval mutiny with its unmistakable nationalist motivation was a slap on the face of British colonial rule in India. Too many Indians had received military training and seen several years of active service during the Second World War. With nationalist sentiments surging in civilian homes and army barracks alike, the Indian armed forces on which the British depended heavily for over a century now posed a potential threat to their supremacy. The Indian National Army (INA) and its leader Subhash Chandra Bose had deeply inspired millions of Indians and the return of the INA leaders at the end of the war followed by their high profile trial for treason and the politicization of the trial by nationalist politicians, lawyers and the press had added tremendously to the tempo of the freedom movement. The British had to choose between violent expulsion and peaceful exit. Shrewd as they were, they chose the latter less painful course.

As the war ended and the British were planning to quit India, different sections of the Muslims were feeling uncertain and apprehensive of their future in what they foresaw to be a Hindu-dominated post-British India. Different proposals to resolve the Hindu-Muslim tangle, while preserving post-independent India’s unity in one form or other, emerged from different quarters, including the Cabinet Mission’s tri-zonal federation plan. Eventually none of them materialised. The series of Gandhi-Jinnah parleys and exchange of correspondence, the Rajgopal Acharia Formula and so on turned out to be illusory in the face of the Congress-League estrangement. In consequence, the division of India looked inevitable.

As Pakistan began to look like an approaching reality, it was interesting to see opportunist Muslim politicians queuing up at the offices of the Muslim League and at the the residences of its leaders, each trying to outpace the other to enroll himself in the Party and find a suitable position in it. One of the most prominent among them was Khan Abdul Qayyum Khan. Believe it or not, Khan Abdul Qayyum Khan had not only started his political career as a member of the Indian National Congress but was from 1937 till 1946 a Congress member of the Legislative Assembly and between 1942 and 1946 he was also the Deputy Leader of the Congress parliamentary party in the Central Legislative Assembly in Delhi. He was an ardent admirer of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, so much so that he authored a book: Gold and Guns, in which he profusely praised the outstandisng leadership of Bacha Khan and his political vision and mission. (The book was last re-printed by Gosha-e-Adab, Quetta in 1972). Yes, the same Qayyum Khan who was later to brutalise the politics of NWFP and inflict fascist methods of repression upon Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and his supporters in his new role as a ‘stalwart’ of the Pakistan Muslim League and its Chief Minister in NWFP! ___ 29 ___

Kalat on its way to independence

Initially, KSNP subscribed to the idea that after India became free, Baluchistan might consider joining the independent and sovereign Federation of India as an autonomous and equal federating unit. But the situation that was emerging in the subcontinent following the end of the War, called for a revision of the earlier position of the Party in the light of a fresh evaluation of the entire scenario. Accordingly, the Working Committee of the KSNP made a thorough reassessment of the situation and adopted a resolution stating its position on the future of Kalat-Baluchistan after the departure of the British. It was decided to send the resolution to Muhammad Ali Jinnah, President of All India Muslim League, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, who was in those days the President of Indian National Congress, and also to the British Viceroy in Delhi. The sum and substance of the resolution was:

• The status of the State of Kalat was not identical to that of the other princely states of India;

• Kalat was not a part of the British Indian empire;

• Kalat’s relations with the British government were governed by various treaties concluded directly with the British Imperial Government in London and not with the one in Delhi;

• Now that the British were leaving India, it was necessary that the treaty obligations were honoured and the independence of Kalat-Baluchistan recognized.

In the months following the announcement on 3rd June 1947 of India’s Partition Plan, the Kalat government made a series of moves including meetings/talks with representatives of the Viceroy and the future Government of Pakistan in Delhi. These talks led to certain preparatory steps towards a formal re-affirmation of the suzerainty of Khan of Kalat over the whole of Baluchistan. One such meeting, something like a Round Table Conference, was held on 4th August 1947 in Delhi. It was chaired by Viceroy Lord Mountbatten and attended by his legal advisor Lord Ismay. Kalat State was represented by Khan of Kalat, Ahmed Yar Khan and Prime Minister Barrister Sultan Ahmed. M. A. Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan represented Pakistan. It resulted in the signing of a 3-point agreement. Mr. Jinnah and Mr. Liaquat signed for Pakistan and Mr. Sultan Ahmed for Kalat. The Agreement stated as follows:

1. Government of Pakistan recognizes the independent and sovereign status of the State of Kalat, which has treaty relations with the British Government and whose status and position is different from other princely states of India.

2. Legal opinion will be obtained to decide whether Pakistan can be the successor to those treaties and to the ones on leased areas.

3. After obtaining the legal opinion, there will be further talks between the representatives of Pakistan and Kalat. In the interim period, there shall be a standstill agreement between Pakistan and Kalat in relation to the areas under lease to the British Government.

Following up on this Agreement, another Agreement was concluded in Delhi on 11th August 1947 between the government of Kalat and the incoming government of Pakistan. The very first clause of the agreement, which was duly broadcast over All India Radio on behalf of the Government of Pakistan, declared: The Government of Pakistan agrees that Kalat is an independent state, being quite different in status from other states of India and commits to its relations with the British Government as manifested in several agreements. On returning from Delhi, Khan of Kalat made a formal proclamation on 12th August 1947 of the independence of Kalat State, effective from 15th August 1947, the day British paramountcy in the subcontinent would lapse. Nawabzada Muhammad Asam Khan was appointed as the first Prime Minister of the State and an Englishman Mr. D.Y. Phell as the Foreign Minister.

Immediately thereafter, in pursuance of the provisions of the 11th August Agreement, the Khan sent the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of the State to Karachi to negotiate with the Government of Pakistan the modalities for concluding a Treaty on the basis of the 4th August 1947 Standstill Agreement relating to the areas held under lease by the outgoing British Government.

*****

Earlier, moving towards establishing some kind of a representative system of governance, ‘associating the people with the government and administration of the State’, the Khan had promulgated a ‘constitution’ through what was called the Government of Kalat State Act 1947. It came into force from 1st August 1947. The Act, inter alia, stated that:

there shall be two Houses of Legislature in the State called the Darul Umara and the Darul Awam. The Darul Umara will represent the Sirdari Inami tribal areas of the State and such other interest as may be assigned to it by His Highness the Khan. It would be composed of the thirty six hereditary sardars representing their Sirdari or Inami areas and tribes, and such other members, not exceeding ten in all, and Ministers as may be nominated by His Highness the Khan. The Darul Awam will represent all the remaining areas and interests of the State, including areas paying land revenue, non-sirdari Jagirs, Muafis, business and ecclesiastical interests etc. The Darul Awam shall be composed of fifty-five members, of whom fifty shall be elected in accordance with rules made under this Act and the remainder shall be nominated by His Highness the Khan.

It was followed by elections to the two houses in the manner as stipulated in the Government of Kalat Act 1947. However, the Khan wanted to block KSNP from putting up party candidates to campaign and contest elections on the basis of the party programme. So, the elections were held non-party basis. However, the majority of members elected to the Darul Awam turned out to be members of KSNP! The Party won 39 out of 52 seats of the Darul Awam. I was elected to the Darul Awam from Khuzdar-Nal constituency. In the first session of the Darul Awam held at Shahi Camp, Dhadar on 12th December, 1947, I was elected as the Parliamentary Leader of the Darul Awam.

After proclaiming independence, the Khan initiated a series of negotiations with the KSNP. Notwithstanding fundamental differences in their respective approaches to the issues facing the State and its people, an agreement was reached between the two on a minimum programme. KSNP agreed to cooperate with the government and allow some of its members to join it as secretaries. Accordingly, Malik Faiz Muhamad Khan Yusufzai, Mir Gul Khan Nasir and Malik Abdurrahim Khwajakhel joined the Government. However, this apparent gesture of trust and goodwill shown by the Khan towards KSNP concealed more than it revealed. The plain truth is that Khan Saheb simply did not trust the KSNP! He was apprehensive of the intentions of the party leadership. Offering government positions to a couple of party activists was one of his tactics to keep KSNP leadership ‘pacified’ and ‘in good humour’ and nothing more.

Baluchistan stood at the crossroads of history. Proclamation of independence was only the first step. There were more critical decisions to be taken. But Khan of Kalat did not consider it necessary to take the KSNP leadership into confidence in matters pertaining to the future relations and negotiations with the British Government or the Government of Pakistan. His most trusted aides even at that crucial juncture in our history were the same officials, who had been posted to Kalat during the last days of British Raj.

Khan Saheb knew well that the Baluch were very sensitive about their independence. However, he seemed to lack the will to take any tangible step towards consolidating the independence of Kalat. For instance, say, a move towards formation of a national government with the participation of the sardars and the representatives of the Baluch people, or initiate diplomatic relations with neighbouring Afghanistan and Iran or repatriation of Pakistani ministers and officials working in the State Government and so on. The irony was that after the creation of the two houses of legislature and holding of the elections, the Khan had come to realize that the Baluch were not prepared for any compromise on their independence. But his heart was not in it. He was readying himself to enter into a process of bargain and compromise. Let us accept the truth; Khan Saheb was a broken man. The grit and conviction to own up ___ 31 ___

and defend independence was no longer in him. He was in fact deceiving the Baluch youth, the freedom-loving Baluch and also himself.

The deception was not to last long. Khan Saheb met Mr. Jinnah in Karachi in October 1947. Jinnah proposed the accession of Kalat to Pakistan. Khan Saheb asked for time to consult the sardars and motabars. On his return from Karachi, he convened both the Houses of parliament to ‘seek a mandate on the matter of Kalat’s merger with Pakistan’. From 12th to 15th December 1947, the Darul Awam held several sessions and debated the proposal. The members were frank and forthright in expressing their views. The speech I delivered in the Darul Awam as Leader of the House on 14th December 1947 forms part of the proceedings of the Session and is printed in the book Tareekh-i-Khawaneen-i-Baluch, published under the name of late Khan of Kalat, Mir Ahmed Yar Khan, by the Islamia Press, Quetta, in 1947.

English translation of excerpts from Mir Sahib’s speech in the Darul Awam (Assembly of Kalat State)

The British Government, by force of arms, enslaved most parts of Asia. British Government was tyrannical, oppressive. It robbed us of our independence. We had never been a part of Hindustan. Pakistan’s demand that Kalat, which had earlier been known as Baluchistan and had been the national homeland of the Baluch, should merge with Pakistan is unacceptable.

Our Khan helped in the formation of Muslim League in Baluch territory. Our homes and vehicles were donated for its propagation. And a large majority of people of Kalat under Khan’s leadership did everything to help the Muslim League succeed. But what is Pakistan giving us in return? How is Pakistan reciprocating? Pakistan does not want to return to us the leased tribal areas which belong to us. We don’t want to keep them in the bond of slavery. They are our brothers. In this capacity they have all along been integral part of Kalat. Pakistan has refused to talk about them. Pakistan’s condition is that until and unless the government of the Baluch went to them with bowed heads and in humility, Pakistan would not talk. We are ready for friendship with honour not in indignity. We are not ready to merge within the frontiers of Pakistan.

We have a distinct culture like Afghanistan and Iran, and if the mere fact that we are Muslims requires us to amalgamate with Pakistan, then Afghanistan and Iran should also be amalgamated with Pakistan. They say that we Baluch cannot defend ourselves in the atomic age. Well, are Afghanistan, Iran and even Pakistan capable of defending themselves against the super powers? If we cannot defend ourselves, a lot of others cannot do so either.

We are asked to sign the death warrant of one and a half crore Baluch of Asia. We cannot be guilty of such a major crime.

Granted that we have no money. But we have abundant mineral resources; we have vibrant seaports; we have unlimited sources of income. Don’t try to force us into slavery in the name of our economic compulsions. If Pakistan as an independent nation wants to have an agreement with us, we shall extend the hand of friendship.

The Darul Awam unanimously rejected the proposal for accession of Kalat to Pakistan.

The Darul Umarah met on January 2, 3 and 4, 1948 and, endorsing the decision of the Darul Awam, unanimously rejected the accession proposal. Some of the salient points raised by the members in their speeches rejecting Kalat’s accession to Pakistan are mentioned below:

• The Baluch had lived as an independent and sovereign nation within their own national territory for several hundred years, preserving and promoting their culture, traditions and customs;

• In 1839, the British began to intrude into the affairs of Kalat State on different pretexts. They soon followed it up with armed intervention, which was resisted by the Baluch;

• From 1839 till 1947, relations between Britain and Kalat were governed by various treaties and agreements concluded between their governments. Even at the Britain-Kalat-Pakistan Round Table Conference held in Delhi on 4th August 1947, the independence and sovereignty of Kalat state was reaffirmed and accordingly an announcement was made to this effect on behalf of the Government of Pakistan on 11th August 1947 from All India Radio, Delhi.

• Kalat-Baluchistan had been a Muslim state like Afghanistan and Iran. Its relations with these neighbouring states were governed by treaties similar to the ones it had with Britain;

• There is absolutely no justification for Kalat-Baluchistan to efface its national and geographical entity, renounce its independence, sovereignty and specific national identity and join Pakistan;

• Kalat-Baluchistan, while maintaining its independent and sovereign status, is willing to establish with Pakistan the same brotherly and friendly relations as it will have with neighbouring Muslim countries, Afghanistan and Iran.

• The Baluch are not prepared to part with their independence and sovereignty at any cost.

True, the British had given the option to the rulers of princely states to accede to India or Pakistan. But the fact is that it did not apply to Kalat. Kalat, as I have repeatedly said, was not one of the several princely states of British India. It had been affirmed and reaffirmed time and again by the British Government that Kalat-Baluchistan was not an Indian princely state but had a treaty relationship with Britain, under which it enjoyed a special status and if it wanted to, it was free to establish relations with Afghanistan.

Pressed by the Pakistan Government, the Khan once again referred the accession issue to both the Houses for reconsideration. Darul Awam again rejected it in its session held on 25th February 1948 and the Darul Umara, in its session held two days later, also refused to accept it.

Kalat’s accession to Pakistan and its aftermath

Despite both houses giving their categorical verdict against Kalat’s accession to Pakistan, Khan Shaib informed the Government of Pakistan to finalise the merger of Kalat within three months. Instead of accepting this offer, the Pakistan government decided to annex Kharan and Lasbela – the two subordinate states of Kalat – and enforcing their ‘merger’ with Pakistan directly. Similarly, Makran which had been a district of Kalat for the last 300 years, was made ‘independent’ of Kalat state on March 17, 1948 and one of its three sardars, Bay Khan Gichki was made its ‘ruler’ (Khan of Kalat’s memoirs, Inside Baluchistan, published in 1975).

Eventually succumbing to incessant pressure from Pakistan Government and due to his own state of indecision, the Khan of Kalat affixed his signature to the Agreement of Accession on 27th March 1948. In taking such a step in gross violation of the will of the people of Kalat-Baluchistan as expressed unanimously by the members of both Houses of Parliament, the Khan rendered himself guilty of an act of great injustice to them. I wonder if history will ever forgive him.

There was very little the people could do to challenge the action of Khan of Kalat. He was their Khan, Khan-e-Azam, Khan-e-Kalat! He was to them not just an individual. He was an institution to which they had looked up to with awe and respect for centuries. Their relationship was governed by centuries-old traditions. And the Khan had signed the instrument of surrender of their State’s independence!

On one side, there was the might of the Pakistan army and behind it stood one hundred million Pakistanis filled with the spirit and fervour of their newly won independence. On the other was the pathetic spectacle of a few lakhs of unarmed and demoralised Baluch, divided into so many tribes and subtribes, whose symbol of unity and strength – the Khan of Kalat – had abandoned them. Suddenly the Baluch nation felt betrayed and lost. In the absence of support from external sources, any attempt on their part to offer resistance would be sheer madness. ___ 33 ___

Thus it was that the patently illegal and immoral annexation of Kalat-Baluchistan passed into the annals of history as voluntary ‘accession’ to Pakistan.

The question arises: Why did Ahmed Yar Khan do it? Though not publicly acknowledged, it is a fact that the Khan and the sardars had, historically speaking, remained at daggers drawn most of the time. They had little trust in each other. Under certain local compulsions, the sardars opposed the accession, but their real role always remained suspect. They kept insinuating that at the end of the day the Khan would compromise and leave them in the lurch. The Khan, on his part, suspected that the sardars would at some stage or the other let him down. As mentioned earlier, the sardars of Kharan, Lasbela and Makran had already abandoned the Khan. Assuming that they were separate entities, independent of Kalat, the Marri, Bugti and Sanjrani sardars in British Baluchistan had also voted in favour of joining Pakistan. Though in number they were just six sardars, in terms of tribal clout and importance, they were the backbone of Khan’s power. They had left him and were now in the opposite camp.

Now let me explain in some more detail why the sardars decided to abandon the Khan. The Marri, Bugti and Sanjrani sardaris were severed administratively from the Khanate of Kalat soon after the British intrusion into Baluchistan. Despite having been tribal territories of Kalat, they suffered from a sense of alienation due to their being counted as the underdogs in the State. On the other hand, they had come to enjoy a privileged status in British Baluchistan. That gave them the feeling that if they joined Pakistan, they would on the one hand continue to enjoy the same kind of a privileged status as in British Baluchistan and on the other, they would no longer have to put up with paying obeisance to the Khan of Kalat. More or less similar was the position of the sardars of Kharan and Lasbela. They had acquired such a status to a certain extent during the British days whereas Makran had been striving for it for a whole century.

The underlying reason for this misconception among the sardars and the motabareen about their future status in Pakistan can be attributed to (1) a general lack of political vision and (2) apathy towards national solidarity and unawareness of the benefits of independent nationhood. It should not be forgotten that the Baluch tribes were yet to evolve and mature into conscious components of a nation. They still remained quarantined within the bounds of tribal, regional and clan-based factionalism. They mistook tribal separatism and ethno-centrism as the symbols of freedom and independence. They were not prepared to merge their separate identities into the larger framework of a Baluch nation.

*****

The political situation in Kalat was dismal, to say the least. Except for a handful of educated youth, who had been influenced by the Indian freedom struggle, all the others were so deeply stuck in the quagmire of tribal loyalties that it was virtually impossible to goad them into any move against their sardars or their Khan. In such circumstances, the Baluch were neither ready for independence nor qualified for it. On the face of it, this may sound too harsh a comment, but sadly enough it is true. The independence, which was knocking at their doors without their having waged an organized people’s struggle for it, went astray by default, as neither the Khan nor the sardars had the gumption to grab it and hold on to it.

If at all anyone did put up some resistance, they were the members of the Darul Awam. They stood firm and steadfast by their commitment. After the Khan signed the instrument of accession, and the first Pakistan-appointed Prime Minister arrived in Kalat, the Khan came under strong pressure from members of the Darul Awam to convene a special session of the house for ratification of the Accession. The Khan agreed but before the members of Darul Awam arrived in Kalat to attend the session, the Prime Minister had got a hint that if the House were allowed to meet, the members would stick to their earlier position of rejection and refuse to ratify the Accession. So, the idea of holding the special session was shelved

The ‘accession’ was followed by the banning of the KSNP and arrests of most of the KSNP leaders and active workers. I too was among the arrested. I was then the Secretary of KSNP besides being the leader of the House in the Darul Awam.