Renewed violence in Balochistan has again brought into focus a basic question: is Pakistan confronting a conventional insurgency, or is it facing a crisis of political legitimacy in the province?
In a conversation on the evolving situation, Capt Alok Bansal, Executive Vice President of the India Foundation, repeatedly returns to the idea that the conflict may be fundamentally misread. Framing Balochistan only as an insurgency risks obscuring deeper drivers such as political alienation, structural state failure, and the absence of meaningful integration.
The discussion revisits Pakistan’s early handling of Balochistan, asking whether opportunities for political accommodation were squandered and whether colonial-era tools of control were inherited rather than redesigned. Across decades, the pattern appears cyclical: limited engagement, coercive crackdowns, temporary arrangements, and renewed coercion. The lack of a sustained political strategy emerges as a core weakness.
Enforced disappearances and collective punishment occupy a central place in the conversation. These practices are described not as peripheral excesses but as integral to how the state has managed dissent. Their persistence raises the question of whether they actively sustain the insurgency by feeding anger, grievance, and radicalization.
Attention is also given to how Baloch militant groups may have changed—becoming more decentralized and networked, and adapting their tactics accordingly. Such shifts complicate traditional counterinsurgency approaches and make purely military solutions appear increasingly inadequate.
China’s expanding footprint in Balochistan, and attacks on China-linked projects, introduce another layer. The discussion asks whether these targets are symbolic, strategic, or evidence that China itself has become part of the grievance structure.
From an Indian perspective, the conversation weighs multiple lenses: human rights concern, diplomatic pressure, and strategic calculation. It also acknowledges the counter-argument that external attention can strengthen the Pakistani Army’s narrative of foreign interference.
Looking ahead, the exchange explores whether the next five years point toward escalation, stalemate, or gradual de-escalation—and what a realistic political settlement might require, including autonomy, resource control, and civilian supremacy.
Watch the full interview to get fascinating insights from an expert into a conflict that could determine the fate of the subcontinent.
