The Balochistan false narrative resurfaced on March 27 through a Europe-based conference framing Kalat’s accession as occupation
On March 27, the Baloch National Movement (BNM), headed by Dr. Naseem Baloch — an anti-Pakistan group operating from Europe and widely seen as a propaganda wing of the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) — organized a conference titled: “Balochistan: 78 Years of Occupation.”
March 27 is a date that marks the accession of a princely state into present-day Pakistan. On March 27, 1948, the princely state of Kalat joined Pakistan. Internationally designated terrorist groups like the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), along with fronts like BNM, frame Kalat’s accession as oppression and occupation.
These groups push false narratives globally, mobilize diaspora networks, and attempt to rewrite history to suit their agenda. At the same time, the BLA continues terrorist activities in Balochistan, inciting youth to take up arms against the state.
This theme is nothing but a distortion of history. Balochistan was never a province, state, or country before 1947. Kalat was not an internationally recognized independent country. It was a princely state under British paramountcy.
Its defense, foreign affairs, and communications were controlled by the British. It had treaty-based autonomy, not sovereignty. When British rule ended in 1947, paramountcy lapsed.
Princely states had only two options: join India or join Pakistan. Independence was not a legal option under the partition framework. Before Kalat’s accession, British Balochistan (Quetta, Pishin, Sibi) had already become part of Pakistan. Lasbela, Kharan, and Makran voluntarily acceded to Pakistan. Gwadar was purchased by Pakistan from Oman in 1958.
By March 1948, most of present-day Balochistan was already part of Pakistan. This directly undermines the claim that Pakistan “occupied” Balochistan through Kalat. This disinformation and rewriting of history has been debunked.
Now let’s take a look at the participants of the seminar built on this distorted theme.
Sardar Akhtar Mengal is part of the Baloch political elite that has ruled the province for decades. He served as Chief Minister of Balochistan from 1997 to 1998, and his father Attaullah Mengal also served as Chief Minister. He is not a sidelined figure but a central actor within the system.
The failure to develop infrastructure, manage resources effectively, and improve governance during his time in power cannot be ignored. These shortcomings have contributed directly to the grievances he now attributes solely to the military and the federal government.
Mengal and other Baloch leaders have repeatedly been part of the national political system. They have held ministerial positions, served in parliament, and exercised significant influence. Their failure to introduce meaningful reforms during their years in power must be questioned.
Akhtar Mengal is now becoming part of this campaign after losing political relevance. He was rejected by the people of Balochistan, and his party lost the 2025 elections.
Manzoor Pashteen, head of the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement (PTM), is also part of this campaign. PTM, founded in 2014, initially emerged as a movement claiming to advocate for communities affected by militancy and the Pakistan Taliban (TTP).
However, its narrative and international networking have shifted over time. It is now seen as being influenced by Afghan diaspora networks in Western capitals, advancing narratives aligned with the Afghan Taliban.
Manzoor Pashteen, who once spoke against TTP violence, is now seen publicly defending or echoing narratives aligned with the Afghan Taliban and its proxy, TTP.
Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa was another panelist. Her credentials stem from her anti-Pakistan narrative. She consistently targets state institutions and maintains relevance through controversial positioning, which keeps her invited to international forums.
Saqlain Imam, a retired BBC journalist, has no significant publications to his name. Currently without a defined professional role, he participates in such discussions to remain relevant.
This is not a debate about history. It is a coordinated attempt to distort facts, mislead audiences, and push a narrative built on selective interpretation. That narrative now stands exposed
