Washington, Feb 7 (NationPress) The ongoing violence in Balochistan is far more than just a law-and-order dilemma; it is a complex interplay of historical, geographical, and a persistent trust deficit between the populace and the state, according to a recent report.

“Balochistan seldom garners sustained international focus unless violence flares up. When it does, it is often summarized in narrow terms: Pakistan's largest yet poorest province, a mineral-rich area beset by insurgency, and a security challenge needing containment,” stated an opinion piece in the US-based Eurasia Review.

These remarks follow the latest series of coordinated attacks throughout the province.

Spanning 347,000 square kilometers, the province makes up 44 percent of Pakistan, yet is home to less than 15 million residents who inhabit its deserts, mountain ranges, and remote valleys nestled between Afghanistan and Iran, as described in the article.

“The province governs crucial regional trade routes due to its 760-kilometer Arabian Sea coastline starting at Gwadar port. The arid terrain hides Pakistan’s most vital mineral resources, including copper, gold, coal, and natural gas,” it noted, adding, “However, these assets have become both a blessing and a curse.”

The locals express deep-seated distrust towards Islamabad, accusing the government of siphoning resources without equitable sharing, which has left them in stagnation and poverty.

Additionally, its geography favors insurgents, making it nearly impossible for security forces to defend such a vast, rugged area with minimal local support.

Recently, the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) executed simultaneous attacks on police stations, banks, and other facilities in multiple locations, dubbing the operation 'Herof 2.0'.

Exploring the tumultuous relationship between Balochistan and the state, the report highlighted that prior to Pakistan's independence, the region consisted of a variety of princely states and directly administered territories.

The accession to Pakistan in March 1948 was perceived by many Baloch nationalists as coerced, igniting the first rebellion. Follow-up uprisings occurred in 1958, the 1960s, the 1970s, and once again from the early 2000s onwards.

“Each uprising followed a familiar pattern: political exclusion and economic grievances, armed resistance, a forceful state response, and a temporary lull that left core issues unresolved,” the article pointed out.

The grievances remain unchanged. Natural gas discovered in the 1950s powered industries nationwide long before Baloch districts were granted access. Presently, significant projects like Reko Diq and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor are viewed locally as extraction without consent. The benefits of development are seen as flowing outward, while local communities remain sidelined.

Where accountability mechanisms lack transparency, mistrust escalates. This leads to a vicious cycle: militant violence undermines the legitimacy of insurgents, yet state repression alienates communities, creating a scenario where neither side possesses clear legitimacy.

While infrastructure and job creation are essential for the region, locals insist their primary grievance is the lack of control over their own affairs. Decisions affecting Quetta and surrounding districts are often perceived as being made in Islamabad, corporate boardrooms, or foreign capitals, it opined.

“The conflict in Balochistan is neither inevitable nor unsolvable. However, as long as it is primarily framed as a counterterrorism issue rather than a political one, the cycle of violence will continue—flaring, subsiding, and returning, each time at an escalating cost to both the province and the Pakistani state,” the report concluded.