Giligit-Baltistan: The Promise of Federal Autonomy

Pakistan’s inability to forge a national identity in the last six decades has led to a fractious nation. The basic premise of carving out Pakistan, a homeland for the Muslims of India has failed. Pakistan is not exactly homogenous, and  provincial, ethnic and sectarian differences, are very much to be seen. The differences are exacerbated with the domination of the province of Punjab in Pakistan, which comprises nearly 55 per cent of the total population, and bags bulk of the jobs in the army and bureaucracy. Ahmed Rashid explains: “Punjab [Province] never accepted Pakistan as multi-ethnic state necessitating equal political rights, greater autonomy for the smaller provinces, and a more equitable distribution of funds”. Their domination has been a cause of severe resentment among the other ethnic communities such as the Sindhis, Baloch and Pashtuns in the state of Pakistan.

The ethnic upheaval in Pakistan, spanning the ‘tribal belt’ from Balochistan to the Northern Areas, including North and South Waziristan, FATA and NWFP has led to the gradual decay of the state’s capacity to govern. Jayshree Bajoria, while writing on the fragile foundations of Pakistan for the Council on Foreign Relations, raises the issue of unstable ‘peripheral’ territories of Pakistan. She asserts that, the “failing writ of the state [Pakistan] in the autonomous areas in the northwest, and the undetermined status of the Federally Administered Northern Areas (FANA)” are a cause for growing concern in Pakistan. Other than the frontier provinces, the two potential hot spots, where a deep sense of alienation and deprivation prevails, are Balochistan and the Northern Areas. The misrule and repression unleashed by successive Pakistani governments in Balochistan to subdue the call for autonomy is well known. But the one that went un-noticed for several decades has been the case of Northern Areas.

Also referred to as Balawaristan (or land of the highlanders), the Northern Areas since partition have been under illegal occupation of Pakistan, and now stands re-christened as Gilgit-Balitstan. The new ‘Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self Governance Order 2009’ which replaces the existing ‘Northern Areas Legal Framework Order 1994’ is an interesting political development in Pakistan. The ordinance drafted under the Chairmanship of Qamar Zaman Kaira, the minister for Kashmir Affairs and Northern Areas (KANA), intends to give some semblance of political autonomy to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. The self rule is proposed to be modelled on lines as accorded to ‘Azad’ Kashmir (Pakistan occupied Kashmir).

The provisions of the ordinance mandate that, the Governor of Gilgit-Baltistan will be the constitutional head and shall be appointed by the President of Pakistan. The Chief Minister will head the Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly, and the cabinet and the advocate general will be selected by Gilgit-Baltistan Council. The Gilgit-Baltistan Council chaired by the Prime Minister will consist of 12 members to include six members recommended by the federal government and another six members proposed by the legislative assembly of the region. The legislative assembly will consist of 33 members, out of which 24 will be elected directly, and another six women and three technocrats will be nominated. The region will have a supreme appellate court comprising one chief judge and five other judges, which will hear appeals against verdicts of all subordinate courts. In addition, the region will have its own election commissioner and an auditor general. A boundary commission is also proposed to be set up to settle the boundary between Pakistan and Gilgit-Baltistan.

The legislation has drawn wide ranging comments from political activists of the region. Ahmed Hamid Khan, the Chairman of Balawaristan National Front (BNF) has outrightly rejected the promulgation. He considers that the new framework does not meet the aspirations of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, and calls for an impartial referendum to decide on the future of the region, under the United Nations resolution of 13th August 1948. Gilgit-Baltistan United Movement (GBUM) while rejecting the new package has demanded that, an independent and autonomous legislative assembly for Gilgit-Baltistan be formed, where the people of Gilgit-Baltistan reserve the right to elect the president and the prime minister. Malika Baltistani, the Chairperson of Gilgit-Baltistan National Alliance (GBNA), in a letter to the Prime Minister of Pakistan writes that, “it is mournful that you have continued a tradition to prolong our slavery by only altering the titles of the portfolios of our future ‘masters’ [rather] than transforming our constitutional, democratic and basic rights from darkness to enlightenment”.

It is quite obvious from various statements that the lead political parties from Gilgit-Baltistan have rejected the new dispensation. The other aggrieved party is the JIAJK (Jamaat-i-Islami Azad Jammu and Kashmir), as they consider the Northern Areas to be a part of the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, and perceive this action as a sell out of the ‘Azad Kashmir’ cause by Pakistan. The moderate and hard factions of the Hurriyat Conference in Srinagar too have objected to the grant of self autonomy to the Northern Areas, albeit in pursuit of its separatist agenda for the state of Jammu and Kashmir.

The strategic significance of the region as a communication hub connecting Pakistan, Afghanistan, China and India is well documented. In 1963 under the Sino-Pakistan Border Agreement, Pakistan had without consent ceded considerable Indian territory to China to facilitate the development of the Karakoram highway, which eventually would connect to the Gawadar Port in Balochistan. China over decades has poured large sums of money and expertise into several infrastructural projects in Gilgit-Baltistan. Many analysts claim that it is just a matter of time when the region becomes a reflection of the neighbouring province of Xinjiang. Now by way of this new legislation, Pakistan is looking at giving legitimacy to Gilgit-Baltistan so that the region can be further exploited. There are several Pakistani projects in the pipeline to exploit the water resources of the region, the Chinese assisted 7000 MW Bunji Hydel project in Astore district being one of them, and as and when these come up, it will benefit the downstream provinces more than the people of Gilgit-Baltistan.
 
Talking about the ramifications of this new political development, it seems that Pakistan has learnt no lessons from the happenings in Balochistan and other federally controlled territories of Waziristan, FATA and NWFP. Instead of genuinely working towards meeting the aspirations of the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, the government of Pakistan is leading them on to a path of confrontation. India has already registered its protest, since the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of our country, and that Pakistan is in illegal possession of the area under question. The Indian government should provide the necessary political and moral support to the people of Gilgit-Baltistan, and spare no effort whatsoever, towards securing them a rightful place in the Indian democracy.

But then this may have its own implications. And as, Sushant Sareen writes in his blog Analysing Pakistan that, our renewed interest in the region may bring Jammu and Kashmir once again under international focus and, more importantly, deprive the local populace the benefits of political activity and economic development under the new legislation. We then surely need to make some careful policy choices.

(Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the views either of the Editorial Committee or the Centre for Land Warfare Studies).