Hard state or a soft state?

Our violence is counterterrorism; theirs is terrorism. Recently, the Pakistan army chief addressed parliament after the Jaffar Express train attack in Balochistan. He said Pakistan had to become a "hard state" to fight militancy and asked how long would countless lives be sacrificed in a soft state, and how long would governance gaps be filled by the blood of soldiers and martyrs.

- ASHRAF JEHANGIR QAZI

The global community also condemned the incident as an act of terror. Nevertheless, human acts, including criminal acts, have context and cause which need to be understood to ensure they are not repeated. This has never happened in Balochistan. Since independence, it has been overtly and/or covertly ruled by the centre. Protests against all kinds of exploitation and denial of human and political rights are equated with disloyalty, and when in desperation they lead to insurgencies they are mercilessly crushed as acts of rebellion, treason, and terror.

The number of Baloch killed, Baloch crippled and wounded, Baloch tortured, Baloch missing, Baloch families forever traumatised, and the Baloch intelligentsia almost irretrievably alienated has, over the decades, added up to maybe millions. Akhtar Mengal, former chief minister of Balochistan who is a political moderate and son of the revered Baloch leader, Ataullah Mengal, has warned the situation in Balochistan today is the biggest threat to Pakistan. Moreover, Baloch alienation has linked up with increasing Pakhtun alienation. This enlarges the problem beyond any military solution. Accordingly, continued military action will only provide neighbours with increased opportunities and incentives to interfere which would eventually render the situation beyond control.