By; Muhammad Ahmed Kasi
The discussion about Balochistan, especially the former Kalat area, is once again very loud in Pakistan. Analysts and commentators keep repeating the same arguments about past mistakes, long-standing grievances, and a so-called sense of deprivation. Many of them say that the state has always chosen the wrong path and that the use of force was a blunder. They strongly argue that only a political solution can work.
However, when these voices are asked what that political solution actually is, the answers are weak and unclear. Most of the time, they suggest empowering the same political leaders and tribal elites who have dominated Baloch politics for decades. These figures have been tested again and again, yet the situation has only worsened. In many cases, they have been part of the problem rather than the solution. Still, they are presented as the only option.
The reality needs to be stated honestly. What Pakistan is facing today is not a province-wide rebellion. It is a limited insurgency, mainly concentrated in areas that once formed the Kalat State. While militant activity has recently reached parts of central Balochistan and Quetta, large areas remain peaceful. The Pashtun belt and Lasbela are mostly calm, while Makran and Kharan are only partially affected. The core problem remains focused in Kalat, Jhalawan, and Sarawan.
Another important point is that the traditional Sardari system no longer controls this conflict. The current violence is largely being carried out by misled Baloch youth. Many of them are educated in mainstream universities, while others have been radicalized in newer institutions in places like Panjgur, Khuzdar, and Turbat. Sadly, some teachers with extreme ideas have also played a role in shaping this mindset. These young people feel angry, confused, and disconnected from reality.
Bringing Sardars back into power will not fix this situation. This approach has failed repeatedly since 1947. Strengthening the same structures again will only repeat old mistakes and deepen public frustration.
It is also important to understand the real aim of the insurgency. This movement is not asking for reforms or better governance. Its clear goal is to separate Balochistan from Pakistan. The promise that Balochistan will suddenly become rich because of minerals and sea routes is a dream sold to young minds, not a serious economic plan.
Foreign involvement cannot be ignored either. External intelligence agencies have supported the insurgency through funding, training, and logistics. This support has helped keep the conflict alive for years. Regional changes may have forced some actors to rethink their approach, but the damage done through long-term interference is still visible.
In this situation, calls for dialogue sound good but do not match the ground reality. Dialogue cannot succeed when one side openly demands separation and challenges the state’s authority. Talks without strength only encourage militants to push further.
Pakistan must therefore prepare for a long and difficult counterinsurgency effort. Such conflicts do not end quickly or easily. What is needed is consistency, political unity, and strong coordination between civilian and military institutions. The state cannot afford to move forward one day and retreat the next.
Balochistan should also not be seen as a single, uniform region. It is diverse in people, geography, and opinions. The problem is localized, but if handled poorly, it can spread. The state must ensure that ordinary people do not remain silent out of fear. Once security improves and fear is reduced, public support naturally comes forward.
A serious response requires firm control of affected areas, a visible and permanent state presence, and strong intelligence coordination. Fear has silenced many voices, including elected representatives. Only sustained action can break this atmosphere of intimidation.
After security is restored, civil administration must immediately step in. Governance should be transparent, efficient, and free from tribal control. Development funds must reach common people, not powerful intermediaries. Every project should be monitored to ensure honesty and real impact.
Finally, the narrative battle is just as important as action on the ground. Militancy survives on myths and emotional slogans. Media, especially social media, should be used to present facts and counter false stories. Many young people involved in violence simply do not know the full truth. Clear and consistent communication can slowly dismantle these lies and restore trust.
