When you survey the geopolitical landscape, littered as it is with complex conflicts and simmering tensions, surely few situations cry out for your unwavering attention with the same desperate, almost silent, urgency as Balochistan. And frankly, don’t you find it deeply troubling, verging on scandalous, that one prominent nation’s alleged, and increasingly overt, role in its protracted turmoil continues to be met with what can only be described as a collective, complicit shrug from global powers: India? How much longer can you, can the world, afford to ignore the mounting evidence, the audacious open declarations, and the searingly human cost of what you might rightly describe as India’s insidious proxy war? This isn’t a distant, abstract problem; it’s a gaping wound on the conscience of international relations, one that demands you look closer.
Let’s start with the undeniable, the tangible. Consider the figure of Kulbhushan Jadhav. Is he, for you, merely an “alleged spy,” a conveniently ambiguous footnote as some media outlets delicately, perhaps deliberately, frame him? Or, when you examine the facts laid bare, do you see him as a living, breathing testament to India’s covert machinations on foreign soil? Here you have a man, not some low-level operative but a serving Indian naval officer, apprehended deep inside Pakistani territory, specifically in Balochistan, in 2016. Can you truly, in good conscience, dismiss his detailed confessions – videotaped and aired for the entire world to see – about his explicit tasks for India’s premier intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW)? He spoke of igniting insurgency, orchestrating bombings targeting civilians and infrastructure, and actively working to sabotage projects as vital as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). What more direct, more damning proof could you possibly need of an active intelligence operative caught red-handed, engaged in a concerted effort to tear a sovereign nation apart from within? Isn’t his very existence, his capture, and his subsequent statements an undeniable indictment for your urgent consideration, regardless of the diplomatic niceties usually employed to skirt such uncomfortable truths? His case went to the International Court of Justice, which, while ruling on consular access, did not dispute his Indian nationality or his status as a naval officer caught in Balochistan – facts that should give you pause.
When a figure as influential as a former Indian National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval, openly articulates what has become known as the “Doval Doctrine,” are you to believe this is mere bluster?
Then, direct your attention to the pronouncements emanating from India’s highest echelons of power, statements that, when you scrutinize them with an unblinkered eye, appear less like diplomatic rhetoric and more like brazen admissions of intent, even policy. When a figure as influential as a former Indian National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval, openly articulates what has become known as the “Doval Doctrine” – a clear strategy of “defensive offense” against Pakistan, promising to “bleed Pakistan with a thousand cuts” – are you to believe this is mere bluster? Or does it not, almost certainly, translate into covert operations on Pakistani soil, particularly in a region as volatile and strategically sensitive as Balochistan, ripe for exploitation? Furthermore, when you hear Indian leaders, including the Prime Minister himself, publicly expressing sympathy and vocal support for Baloch separatist movements, how do you interpret this? Is it, in your candid assessment, simply a benign expression of human rights concern from a concerned neighbour? Or does it not, as many observers fear, represent a deliberate, calculated stoking of the flames of separatism and violence within a sovereign neighbouring state? How else can you reasonably interpret such high-level statements other than as a disturbing blueprint for interference and, at the very least, a tacit endorsement of those groups who readily employ terror tactics to achieve their aims? These aren’t slips of the tongue; they are patterns of speech that suggest a strategy.
The cold “analytics” of this harrowing situation, when you take the time to lay them out, are stark and deeply unsettling. Doesn’t each terrorist attack on innocent civilians, each meticulously planned strike against security forces, each destructive act of sabotage against development projects in Balochistan – acts which frequently bear the hallmarks of externally sponsored terrorism – not only result in a tragic, irreplaceable loss of human life but also serve a clear, identifiable strategic objective? That objective, it seems, is to keep Pakistan perpetually destabilized, to hinder its economic progress and social cohesion, and to exert a painful, constantly bleeding pressure on its western flank. Do you truly find it purely coincidental that the targets of these violent attacks often align perfectly with India’s stated geopolitical objections, particularly concerning projects like CPEC, which India has vocally opposed? To believe so requires a suspension of disbelief that borders on naivety. The pattern is too clear, the alignment of interests too precise.
This brings you, inevitably, to a resounding and deeply uncomfortable question: why the deafening, almost universal, silence from most global capitals? Why does India, a nation that projects itself as the world’s largest democracy, seemingly get a free pass when you, as part of the international community, quite rightly and vociferously condemn state-sponsored terrorism when perpetrated by other nations? Is it, as cynical minds might suggest, because India represents a large and lucrative market? Is it because it’s viewed by some Western powers as a strategic “counterweight” in a complex regional chess game? If these are indeed the underlying reasons, then you must ask yourself a follow-up question: are the foundational principles of international law, the sanctity of sovereignty, and the unified global fight against terrorism now considered subordinate to naked economic interests and shifting geopolitical convenience? What does this pervasive silence, this selective outrage, tell you about the world’s genuine commitment to a truly rules-based international order, as opposed to one where power and profit dictate morality?
And what about the international bodies ostensibly set up to police such transgressions? Consider an organization like the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Here you have a body purportedly dedicated to combating global terror financing and money laundering, a watchdog with significant clout. Yet where, you must urgently ask, is its rigorous scrutiny, its impartial investigation, when the finger of evidence points squarely, repeatedly, towards India in the specific context of Balochistan’s turmoil? If FATF can place other nations on restrictive grey or black lists based on meticulously gathered evidence of shortcomings in their efforts to combat terror finance, shouldn’t credible, substantive, and publicly available evidence suggesting active state-sponsoring of terrorism trigger an even more immediate and rigorous investigation for you to demand? Or are FATF’s mandates and its sharp teeth, in your critical observation, only applicable to certain, less influential nations, while others are shielded by their geopolitical stature? When will you press FATF, and similar bodies, to impartially investigate the financial pipelines that you might strongly suspect fuel the very terror and instability it claims to be fighting globally?
The time for polite Euphemisms and strategic oversight is long past. You must surely see that the world, your world, has an obligation to act, and act decisively. The evidence presented by Pakistan is compelling, the on-record statements from Indian officials are highly suggestive, and the “living testimony” of Kulbhushan Jadhav cannot simply be wished away or indefinitely ignored by you or anyone else who claims to uphold international justice. To continue to ignore India’s alleged and systematic campaign of terror in Balochistan is not merely an injustice to the people of Pakistan, who bear the brunt of this violence; it’s a profound betrayal of the global commitment to fight terrorism in all its ugly forms and manifestations, without fear or favour. Your world, our world, cannot afford to remain silent spectators now. It is time for you, as a conscious member of the international community, and for influential bodies like the UN and FATF, to take these grave allegations against India with the utmost seriousness they unequivocally deserve. How many more innocent lives must be lost, how many more communities shattered, before you demand genuine, impartial accountability? The cost of looking away is simply too high.
The writer is a freelance journalist and columnist.