Balochistan: a long tale of oppression and resistance – what is the solution?

The struggle of the Baloch people in Pakistan has reached unprecedented levels, while state repression and the brutality by the Pakistani ruling class have exceeded all limits. It is hell-bent on crushing the aspirations of these oppressed people.

On the one hand, there exists a mass movement of the Baloch people, which has reached a level unseen in seven decades of continuous struggle against the Pakistani state. In Quetta, security forces have opened fire on protestors who refused to disperse. In response, even more people joined the protests.

Women and children have joined in in large numbers, and have been brutally attacked by the security forces. Huge protests have been held in many cities across Balochistan in which women and children have participated in large numbers. In small cities and remote areas, protests of thousands have been held. In Baloch areas of Karachi as well, we have seen huge protests held.

When the leaders of this mass movement led by the Baloch Solidarity Committee (BYC) were arrested, including Mahrang Baloch, the protestors were infuriated and even bigger protests were held in different cities despite state repression. Solidarity has been forthcoming from ordinary people of other nationalities across Pakistan and there is widespread condemnation of this state repression.

This is a major development in the struggle of the Baloch people, who have been fighting against repression for the last seven decades. The level of participation of the masses is unprecedented. Furthermore, this mass movement has rejected all the mainstream political parties, including the Baloch nationalist parties like the BNP of Akhtar Mengal and others present in parliament. Instead, a new leadership has been brought forwards for the first time, one which has no representation in the facade of parliament, but which has also distanced itself from the armed insurgency.

Though the state authorities are attacking the mass movement while accusing them of being insurgents and guerrillas, these are two distinct movements. This has brought the whole situation in Balochistan to a qualitatively new phase, in which most of the region is now inaccessible to the outside world. The main highways can only be used during the daytime. Army and other installations are being attacked on a regular basis, and the security situation is worsening all the time.

Baloch nationalist groups, who are fighting an ongoing armed insurgency, are also using this situation to further their own agendas. They have been attacking army installations and security forces like never before. There are reports of links between the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which clearly shows how far they have degenerated thanks to their rotten nationalist ideology.

On 11 March, a train hijacking by the BLA once again brought the oppression of Balochistan into the spotlight across Pakistan and the world. While the Baloch insurgents have carried out multiple attacks in the past, the train hijacking was the first of its kind and the biggest incident of 2025 so far.

On 11 March, a train hijacking by the BLA once again brought the oppression of Balochistan into the spotlight / Image: public domain

However, last year was the deadliest year of the past decade for Baloch armed insurgents. According to them, their organisations carried out a total of 938 attacks, resulting in more than 1,002 deaths, 689 injuries, and at least 546 reported incidents of property damage. Their operations spanned 25 districts of Balochistan and covered 327 areas. Additionally, 76 Baloch fighters were reported killed during these actions. Compared to 2023, the total number of attacks increased by 53 percent, while reported casualties rose by a shocking 80 percent, indicating an intensification of the insurgency. 

During the train hijacking, the BLA demanded the release of political prisoners and the recovery of individuals abducted by the state authorities. However, the state rejected all of these demands and announced a military operation against them.

As a result, according to state officials, around 26 passengers were killed and 37 injured in the attack, while 33 insurgents were eliminated. However, the BLA dismissed the government statement as propaganda and claimed to have killed around 214 of the 426 hostages. As of the time of writing, conflicting reports about the hijacking of the Jaffar Express continue to circulate in the media. 

Since this attack, social media has erupted in debate, reflecting opposition to the state among young political activists in Pakistan, especially in Balochistan. As communists, it is necessary to critically analyse the current conditions in Balochistan, the Baloch national question, and the role of both politics and armed resistance in this context, while presenting a correct communist position.

The Baloch national question and armed struggle

Numerous books have been written on the Baloch national question, but briefly, it is important to note that when Pakistan was created by the British imperialists, most of Balochistan was part of the princely state of Kalat, except for British Balochistan. The Pakistani ruling class used force and blackmail to annex Kalat, despite the state's parliament opposing its merger with Pakistan. Concrete evidence exists regarding this opposition.

However, on 27 March 1948, when this annexation was forcibly carried out, the first armed Baloch rebellion began under Prince Karim of Kalat. This rebellion was, however, disorganised and weak from the outset and crushed within a short period. Resistance remained largely confined to specific areas of Kalat.

Following Prince Karim’s uprising, Baloch armed resistance can be divided into four other major phases, as follows:

Second Phase (1958-59)

Tribal leader Nawab Nauroz Khan Zehri led a rebellion against dictator General Ayub Khan’s One Unit policy, which merged the four provinces of Pakistan into one and abolished Baloch autonomy. Nowroz Khan launched a guerrilla war in the mountains, but the government used negotiations to trick him into surrendering and then arrested him. Several of his companions were executed, and he died in prison.

Third Phase (1962-69)

During this period, Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri and other Baloch tribal leaders resisted Pakistani rule. Armed clashes continued in Khuzdar, Mastung, Kohlu, and Makran. In 1969, General Yahya Khan abolished the One Unit system, temporarily halting the resistance.

Fourth Phase (1973-77)

During Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's government, the elected provincial governments of the National Awami Party (NAP) in Balochistan and the erstwhile North-West Frontier Province (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) were dismissed. In response, armed resistance intensified.

Thousands of Baloch guerrilla fighters fought under the leadership of Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri, Attaullah Mengal, and Sher Muhammad Marri (popularly known as General Sherov). Most of these leaders were inspired by Marxist ideas and looked towards the Soviet Union for inspiration.

The military operation launched by the Bhutto regime to combat the insurgency resulted in thousands of Baloch casualties, and many leaders fled to Afghanistan. The movement ended after General Zia declared martial law in 1977 and deposed Z.A. Bhutto.

Fifth Phase (2000 – present)

A new phase of resistance began in the 2000s under the leadership of tribal leader and former governor of Balochistan Nawab Akbar Bugti. It intensified following his assassination by the state in 2006, during General Musharraf’s dictatorship.

Several groups, including the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), the Balochistan Republican Army (BRA), the United Baloch Army (UBA), and the Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF), became active in this period. This resistance continues to this day, with Baloch armed separatist groups engaged in conflict with the Pakistani state. However, in the current armed insurgency, the BLA and BLF remain the most active, while other groups have significantly diminished on the ground. 

This phase of insurgency is also characterised by an ideological shift towards the right, with insurgents looking towards US imperialism and other powers for support. 

Another feature has been the change in the social background of the leadership. In the past, the insurgency was led by tribal leaders and feudals. Now, youngsters from middle-class backgrounds, professionals like doctors and university graduates are leading these organisations. 

The appearance of Chinese imperialism on the scene in the last two decades has intensified the contradictions in the region bordering Iran and Afghanistan. In 2015, the CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor) was launched, with the Gwadar port in Balochistan as its flagship project.

Between 2006 and 2018, attacks by armed insurgents targeting the military, the Frontier Corps, police, and Chinese projects increased. However, the movement suffered a setback when the state intensified its repression of democratic and political organisations. The first casualty of this suppression was the Baloch Students Organization Azad (BSO Azad), which was banned in 2013. 

During General Musharraf’s dictatorship, a wave of enforced disappearances began, which is still going on to this day. They targeted the leadership of BSO Azad and the Baloch National Movement. Many were killed, their bodies mutilated. Others were forcibly disappeared. Most of the political activists arrested remain imprisoned today. Some managed to flee Pakistan. Despite the repression, the BSO Azad and BNP continue to operate, but clandestinely, with minimal presence on the ground. 

Additionally, attacks by the state, including mutilation and enforced disappearances, escalated alongside large-scale operations by the Pakistani military in Baloch areas, particularly Awaran, Mastung, Panjgur, Kharan, Khuzdar, Kalat, and Turbat. Meanwhile, Baloch armed groups continued their operations, specifically targeting the CPEC project after 2015. In response, state repression also intensified.

The increased state repression led to temporary stagnation in Baloch society. It also caused rifts within the Baloch militant organisations. Initially, the armed struggle weakened considerably. However, after 2018, Baloch armed organisations began restructuring themselves and eliminating state infiltrators who had entered their ranks over time. 

The first suicide attack by the BLA occurred in 2012 against Shafiq Mengal, an Islamic fundamentalist and the commander of a notorious death squad who was supported by the Pakistani state. After that, such attacks ceased until 11 August 2018, when a suicide attack targeted a Chinese convoy in Dalbandin, marking the BLA’s resurgence under new leadership. Before this, the ban on BSO Azad had made recruitment challenging for armed separatist groups.

The changing landscape of Baloch society after 2018

In November 2018, Seema Baloch, the sister of BSO Azad’s central information secretary Shabbir Baloch, announced a protest against her brother’s enforced disappearance. A large section of the public responded, and Baloch society once again mobilised against state repression. This call played a decisive role in breaking the suffocating atmosphere that had prevailed between 2013 and 2018 due to state repression. However, oppression persisted in different forms. The protests slowed down during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019, but in May 2020, a new wave of demonstrations emerged, organised by the Bramsh Solidarity Committee, following an attack on a house in a suburb of Turbat in which a four-year-old girl, Bramsh Baloch, was injured.

In August 2020, Frontier Corps personnel shot and killed a young student, Hayat Baloch, in front of his parents. This incident led to the formation of the Hayat Solidarity Committee and triggered protests not only in Balochistan but across Pakistan. This involved human rights activists, students, youth, political workers, and workers. For the first time, as a result of this movement, a Frontier Corps wing commander was forced to publicly apologise to Hayat Baloch’s family and offer compensation for his killing. These two incidents played a crucial role in mobilising a larger mass movement against human rights violations and state repression in Balochistan, eventually leading to the formation of the Baloch Solidarity Committee (BYC).

Between 2020 and 2024, Baloch society witnessed a continuous wave of protests against human rights violations, enforced disappearances, economic hardship, and other injustices / Image: Baloch Yakjehti Committee, Twitter

Between 2020 and 2024, Baloch society witnessed a continuous wave of protests against human rights violations, enforced disappearances, economic hardship, and other injustices. These demonstrations played a significant role in highlighting the issues faced by the Baloch people. Throughout Balochistan, long sit-ins, rallies, and protests were organised against enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. Two major mass movements stand out in this period.

In 2021, a new mass movement called Haq Do Tehreek (‘Give Us Rights Movement’) emerged in Gwadar. Fishermen and local residents protested for employment opportunities, an end to illegal deep-sea trawling, and the provision of basic facilities. This was the first major public expression of resistance against Chinese imperialism’s investments in Balochistan. Thousands of people in the Makran Division, particularly in Gwadar, staged weeks-long sit-ins. This movement exposed the reality of Chinese imperialist projects for the local residents and sparked a new debate within Baloch nationalist parliamentary politics.

In April 2022, the Balochistan Employees and Workers Grand Alliance (BEWGA) organised a 12-day sit-in protest which involved hundreds of thousands of workers and employees from across Balochistan. Although this protest did not achieve its expected success, it firmly asserted the presence of the working class in Balochistan, silencing those nationalists who had denied its existence.

In 2023, 813 protests were recorded across Balochistan on various issues, with 418 focused on enforced disappearances. In Quetta, 554 protests were held, followed by 70 in Turbat, 61 in Chaman and 50 in Khuzdar. 

In December 2023, a wave of protests and sit-ins began in Turbat against the extrajudicial killing of Balach Baloch. This movement evolved into a long march to Islamabad. The march received tremendous support from the masses from all the cities it passed. The women who led the movement, especially Mahrang Baloch, became new icons of struggle with a level of mass support which has never before been seen in the history of the movement. Importantly, this time, the Baloch movement received solidarity from other nationalities in Pakistan, including Pashtuns and Punjabis. It also clearly vindicated the fact that the methods of political struggle are far more effective than guerilla warfare.

Following this march, the BYC gained recognition as a significant mass movement of the Baloch people, not only in Balochistan but across Pakistan and internationally. Since then, the BYC has organised numerous protests, rallies, and sit-ins, notably the Raji Machi in Gwadar in July 2024, in which tens of thousands participated despite severe state repression, including the police shooting at and killing participants of this public meeting. In early 2025, the BYC held a massive protest rally in Dalbandin. To this day, its demonstrations and sit-ins continue.

This provides a brief historical overview. Next, we will analyse the ideological, tactical, and objective limitations of armed struggle from a Marxist perspective.

The communist perspective on armed struggle

For Marxists, the choice or rejection of a particular tactic is not a principled question. Most important are the principles and methods from which these tactics are derived. Marxists have long maintained a historically worked out position on guerrilla warfare, a position refined by thinkers following Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky. 

Vladimir Lenin, the leader of the Russian Revolution, explained this in his famous pamphlet, Guerrilla Warfare, which was written in September 1906 following the failure of the 1905 revolution. This was a time when the Tsarist regime had banned all forms of political and democratic struggle. 

Lenin emphasised that Marxism does not reject any form of struggle out of principle, nor does it limit itself to the existing or possible forms of struggle / Image: public domain

Lenin emphasised that Marxism does not reject any form of struggle out of principle, nor does it limit itself to the existing or possible forms of struggle. Instead, Marxism learns from the experiences of the masses rather than imposing the views of any great theorist onto society.

Moreover, Lenin argued that Marxism takes a historical approach. He explained that methods of struggle depend on political, national, cultural, and material conditions. The selection of a tactic must align with these circumstances. Deciding on the validity of a form of struggle in advance, without a detailed analysis, contradicts dialectical materialism.

If we examine Baloch society through this lens, several critical questions arise. What are the political, social, and economic conditions in Balochistan? What are the causes, manifestations, and forms of armed struggle? When did this tactic emerge, and how widespread is it? What role is it playing in the overall direction of the Baloch movement? How does it relate to the working class and the overall situation?

Before answering these questions, we consider it necessary to present the position of another key leader of the Bolshevik Revolution, Leon Trotsky. In his 1909 article, Why Do Marxists Oppose Individual Terrorism? Trotsky writes:

“A terrorist attempt, whether ‘successful’ or not, depends on concrete political conditions to determine whether it will cause trouble for the ruling class. But whatever the conditions may be, this trouble is only temporary; the capitalist state does not depend on individual government ministers, nor does it cease to exist with their elimination. The classes that this state serves will always find new representatives; the system will persist and continue to function.”

He continues:

“We oppose individual terrorism because individual revenge does not satisfy us. The account we have to settle with the capitalist system is so vast that it cannot be balanced by the removal of a single government official—called a minister or otherwise. To witness all the crimes committed against humanity, to see all the humiliation inflicted upon the human body and soul, to understand this as an expression of the present society, and to channel all our energies into the struggle against this system—this is the path where the flames of vengeance can find their highest fulfillment.”

Comparing organised mass struggle with armed struggle, Trotsky states:

“In our view, there is no place for individual terrorism because it diminishes the role of the masses in their own consciousness, makes them feel weak, and directs their hopes toward a great messiah who will one day rescue them from their suffering and fulfill their cause. Anarchists advocating for ‘propaganda of the deed’ can present countless arguments about the powerful impact of terrorism on the people. However, theoretical reflection and political experience present a contrary reality. The more ‘effective’ an act of terrorism is, the less interest the masses will have in their own education and organisation. As soon as the atmosphere of crisis fades, life resumes its usual course, the wheel of capitalist exploitation begins to turn again, and only police repression becomes more brutal. As a result, instead of hope and artificially induced excitement, apathy and deadened spirits take their place.”

Guerrilla warfare and the current mass movements

We have already touched on the mass movements that have erupted in Balochistan over the past six years. However, addressing all the questions these movements pose would require an exceedingly lengthy article. 

Nevertheless, we can advance the conversation by simply noting that several movements are currently active in Balochistan. Among them, the Baloch Yakjehti Committee (Baloch Solidarity Committee) stands out as a remarkable mass movement against national oppression. We have also recently seen workers from public institutions signal their intention to launch a large-scale movement for their own demands.

In order to work out tactics, it is crucial for communists to analyse the economic, political, and social conditions of society and assess the current situation in Balochistan.

The Baloch Yakjehti Committee (Baloch Solidarity Committee) stands out as a remarkable mass movement against national oppression / Image: Baloch Yakjehti Committee, Twitter

Is state repression at a level where mass struggle for democratic, political, and economic rights has become impossible? The second question is: is the state in a position to conduct large-scale military operations similar to those carried out a decade ago? The intent behind raising these questions is not to suggest that national oppression in Balochistan will decrease – on the contrary, it may intensify. However, answering these two critical questions is essential in shaping our perspective on the current situation.

The answer to the first question should serve as a moment of reflection, not only for guerrilla fighters but also for those intellectuals who were previously pessimistic and believed that there was no possibility of mass struggle in Baloch society outside of armed resistance by small groups. The ongoing movement in Balochistan answers this question directly and serves as an inspiring example of mass mobilisation alongside the massive movements led by women across Pakistan and the world. A separate discussion could be dedicated to understanding why this movement has, by circumstance, come under the leadership of women.

As for the second question, Pakistan – including Balochistan – and the world at large are undergoing unprecedented transformations. These changes are deeply affecting the Pakistani state, which is plagued with both external and internal crises. 

Large-scale military operations in Balochistan no longer serve their purpose for the state. Rather, they have provoked more hatred and revolt among the masses, which has fed recruitment into the guerilla groups, as well as growing fractures within the Pakistani state. As communists, we have always opposed the Pakistani state’s military operations, and we will continue to do so.

Additionally, it is important to highlight that a mass movement against state repression is currently active in Baloch society. The weakening of the Pakistani military and the state in Balochistan is largely a result of this vibrant movement of the Baloch people. It is the largest political mobilisation in Baloch society’s history, and it has inflicted both a moral and political defeat to the state as well as significantly lowering the morale of the Pakistani military. For these reasons, the BYC, along with the broader political mobilisation in Baloch society, poses a serious threat to the state. In this regard, we urge Baloch youth to strengthen this movement further.

Due to state repression, the patience of Baloch society has reached its breaking point, as demonstrated by the remarkable mass movements and protests over the past year and a half. Previously, the families of those kidnapped by the state would remain silent due to the fear of further repression. Now, as soon as an enforced disappearance occurs, major highways are blocked indefinitely in protest. 

Given this context, the likelihood of the Pakistani state launching large-scale military operations seems limited. But they cannot be entirely ruled out. A weakening state may resort to even greater brutality. After all, Balochistan has faced continuous military operations for the past two and a half decades, and intensified state repression has always been a consequence of armed struggle.

Political activists, in particular, have borne the brunt of these brutal operations. Additionally, Baloch students studying in Punjab, Sindh, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa may face even more severe consequences. Nonetheless, it is crucial to emphasise that the ultimate responsibility for these operations and state repression lies with Pakistan’s capitalist state, which carries out these actions in the interests of both domestic and global capitalists.

The people of Balochistan are currently engaged in a powerful and dynamic mass struggle against national oppression. At the same time, the working class across Balochistan and the entire country is beginning to rise. Huge mass movements are also ongoing in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, Gilgit-Baltistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. As communists, our focus and support must be directed toward these mass movements, which are actively fighting in the present moment.

The limitations of armed struggle are evident, as this approach has been tested for the past 78 years without yielding any significant results. The need of the hour is to connect these movements so that a decisive struggle can begin against the system of oppression, repression, and exploitation.

Mass movements and the crisis of leadership

In his Transitional Programme, Leon Trotsky aptly stated, “The historical crisis of mankind is reduced to the crisis of the revolutionary leadership.” While the masses possess both the desire and capacity for struggle, the absence of the proper leadership needed for revolutionary change ultimately causes their efforts to dissipate. If equipped with a leadership that is correct, revolutionary, and genuinely committed to addressing the issues of the masses, the movement has strong foundations for eliminating all forms of oppression.  This insight remains true today, particularly in the context of ongoing mass movements worldwide which lack revolutionary leadership.

Due to the complexity of this discussion, we will focus briefly on the leadership of the ongoing mass movement in Baloch society, which has faced significant criticism and scrutiny. 

In Balochistan, there is, on one hand, a wave of adventurism in the form of guerrilla warfare, fueled by a long history of immense sacrifices and genuine aspirations for freedom. On the other hand, we see the height of opportunism manifested in collaboration with the state and in parliamentary politics. In contrast to these two extremes, the BYC represents a mass movement. However, the leadership of this movement lacks a clear, programmatic line to guide the Baloch struggle forward.

No other mass movement in Baloch society has ever achieved such a wide-reaching mobilisation / Image: Baloch Yakjehti Committee, Twitter

While the movement is fundamentally based on human and democratic rights and has, for the first time in Baloch history, successfully mobilised and connected Baloch populations across Balochistan and the country, it faces significant challenges. 

In this, the movement organised by the BYC has achieved great success. No other mass movement in Baloch society has ever achieved such a wide-reaching mobilisation. However, the movement’s leadership has failed to adequately reflect the true sentiments of the masses. Although the movement aims to achieve national liberation through mass struggle against national oppression, it has yet to clearly articulate how this liberation will be achieved or by what means. These crucial questions remain unanswered.

Due to the absence of a clear programme, a small number of the movement’s young vanguard have begun to join the ranks of Baloch armed freedom fighters. This has been particularly evident in the increased participation of youth joining the Majeed Brigade (an elite wing of BLA) after 2020. 

Meanwhile, the movement continues to be further restricted by a narrow nationalist ideology, which limits the struggle against Baloch oppression solely to the Baloch people – an indication of narrow-mindedness. Balochistan cannot be liberated except through the combined efforts of all the oppressed peoples of Pakistan to overthrow the exploiting capitalist class and its oppressive state. 

The idea of appealing to other oppressed nationalities and the working class across Pakistan is often considered offensive. However, at the same time, there is talk of seeking intervention from imperialist institutions such as the United Nations, imperialist states, and NGOs. 

In reality, appealing to these imperialist institutions, states, and NGOs is a blatant insult to the mass movement itself. It is a grave and regrettable act that isolates the movement from other oppressed nationalities and exploited classes across Pakistan. The disgraceful role of these imperialist institutions, states, and NGOs is evident worldwide – what have they done for Palestine, for instance?

Can guerrilla warfare be anti-imperialist in today's era?

From a Marxist perspective, the nature of guerrilla warfare and its anti-imperialist character depend on specific historical, social, and economic conditions. Not every armed struggle can be classified as anti-imperialist: it is essential to examine its background, leadership, class foundations, and political objectives. 

In Marxist terms, an anti-imperialist struggle is one that directly opposes the global capitalist system, colonial or semi-colonial exploitation, and multinational monopolies. If a guerrilla war is genuinely directed against these forces, it can be considered anti-imperialist.

Revolutionary leader Lenin described imperialism as the highest and final stage of capitalism, where capitalist states subjugate other nations through economic, political, and military means. Therefore, the goal of an anti-imperialist struggle cannot only be national liberation, as even formally ‘independent’ countries remain dominated by imperialist powers. It must also fight for the elimination of capitalist exploitation.

To determine whether the Baloch armed guerrilla struggle is anti-imperialist, we must analyse it in its class, national, and international context. No political or guerrilla struggle can be automatically labeled as anti-imperialist unless its leadership, ideology, and objectives are explicit. 

There is no doubt that Pakistan operates as a link in the imperialist chain and that Chinese imperialist investments are deeply embedded within it / Image: شہاب, Wikimedia Commons

The Baloch armed fighters are primarily nationalists advocating for Baloch national liberation. Although there has been a shift in leadership – from tribal chiefs and feudals to middle-class nationalists – their goals remain limited to the secession of Balochistan, without any mention of a socialist alternative.

Baloch armed fighters often label the Pakistani state as an imperialist power and consider their struggle against it to be an anti-imperialist war. However, from a Marxist standpoint, the issue is more complex. There is no doubt that Pakistan operates as a link in the imperialist chain and that Chinese imperialist investments are deeply embedded within it. Baloch armed fighters also oppose Chinese investments, but their opposition primarily stems from Pakistan’s occupation of Balochistan, as these investments benefit the Pakistani state and are thus seen as undermining Baloch self-determination. The key question is: if an independent Balochistan were to be established under their leadership, would they still oppose Chinese investments?

Furthermore, achieving independence from one imperialist state requires opposition to global capitalism, other imperialist powers, and imperialism as a whole in order to define the true purpose of the movement. However, Baloch armed fighters lack this approach – not only are they not directly struggling against global imperialist capitalism, but they also lack a theoretical and political programme for this.

During the existence of the Soviet Union, national liberation struggles – whether in the form of guerrilla warfare or mass movements – where they sought to emulate the model that existed in the Soviet Union, were often infused with strong anti-imperialist elements. These movements also often received material and political support from the Soviet Union, although under the Stalinist bureaucracy, this material aid was limited to where it corresponded to the narrow national interests of that bureaucracy. If guerrilla warfare at that time could rarely sustain itself without the backing of another state, a similar question must be raised today about the Baloch guerrilla war and other armed struggles, where that aid can only be forthcoming from other capitalist states.

For instance, the Kurdish armed movement, centered around the national question, currently depends on material support from U.S. imperialism. These are critical questions that conscious and sincere political activists must strive to understand.

No national liberation is possible if throwing off the yoke of one imperialist master means bending beneath the yoke of another imperialist master. In Balochistan, where the struggle of U.S. imperialism against Chinese imperialism is overlaid on the struggle of the Baloch people against the oppression of the Pakistani state, a position of class independence from all these reactionary gangs is vital.

What do communists want?

As communists, we seek to eliminate all forms of oppression – class, national, religious, gender-based, fundamentalism – as well as enforced disappearances, mutilation of dead bodies of abducted people, terrorism, and other crimes. 

This goal can be achieved by nothing less than the dismantling of the exploitative capitalist system based on private ownership, which reinforces national oppression. The abolition of capitalism would automatically end plunder and imperialist struggles for the division of resources.

Additionally, we aim to dismantle Pakistan’s capitalist state, including its judiciary, police, military, paramilitary forces, and other institutions that uphold this system. Simultaneously, we strive to eradicate poverty, deprivation, lack of healthcare, unemployment, illiteracy, and backwardness.

Our struggle is international in scope, addressing fundamental democratic, economic and political issues not only in Pakistan but across the globe. Our objective is to connect the fight against national oppression in Balochistan with the broader global struggle against capitalism and imperialism, with the ultimate goal of abolishing this inhumane system altogether.

Why is socialist revolution the path to liberation?

The conclusion of this entire discussion is that, in order to eliminate a disease, the first step is to correctly diagnose it. Only with an accurate diagnosis can we find the right treatment. Capitalism has become a pandemic, and a cure is impossible without a socialist revolution. If we succeed in carrying out a socialist revolution, we will eradicate all the crimes associated with capitalism.

At present, capitalism has reached a point where lasting reforms are no longer possible, and instead, counter-reforms dominate. The world’s leading imperialist power, the United States, under Trump’s leadership, has adopted protectionist policies, which clearly demonstrate the decline of the system.

If a movement today achieved national independence while remaining within the capitalist framework, it would remain trapped within the global imperialist system. Today, they may be oppressed by one imperialist power, but tomorrow they will fall under the dominance of another – true freedom would remain elusive.

Resolving fundamental democratic issues, including the national question, is inherently tied to socialist revolution / Image: Baloch Yakjehti Committee, Twitter

Marxists understand that the productive forces have reached a stage where private ownership and the nation-state have become obstacles to their further development. If these obstacles are not removed, capitalism will eventually destroy the very forces it has created, as we can already see in its wars, environmental catastrophes, and global economic crises. The only solution is the establishment of a socialist planned economy and a global socialist system, where production is organised for collective welfare rather than private profit.

The so-called ‘Third World’ has historically been oppressed and exploited by the advanced capitalist countries. Due to the backwardness of capitalism in these regions, even the most basic issues cannot be resolved without a revolutionary solution. Resolving fundamental democratic issues, including the national question, is inherently tied to socialist revolution.

For this reason, in our writings, speeches, and discussions, we identify capitalism as the root of all these problems. We firmly believe that national and democratic movements must align their struggle with the cause of socialist revolution. Communists, of course, support the legitimate national aspirations of the Baloch people, but we point out that these can only be achieved in the struggle for a voluntary socialist federation of all the peoples of Pakistan and the whole region.

As we mentioned earlier, accurate diagnosis is the key to correct treatment. Similarly, the resolution of national oppression – including the Baloch national question and others around the world – can no longer be found within nationalist ideologies. Trotsky once said that the nationalism of oppressed peoples can be the “outer shell of an immature Bolshevism.” The ‘nationalism’ of the exploited Baloch people undoubtedly represents a rebellion against their national humiliation and exploitation.

But in order to find a path towards liberation from this oppression, it is necessary for the advanced workers and youth of Balochistan to break through the shell of nationalism and understand that their freedom is connected to the struggle of the working class, across Pakistan and the world, to end capitalism. Any movement that remains circumscribed within the limited shell of nationalism must inevitably lean toward right-wing politics rather than the left, making them incapable of standing against imperialism. 

Nationalism for the Baloch people today presents two extreme paths – one of adventurism and the other of opportunism. There is no third path available unless the limits of nationalism are overcome and the struggle for national liberation takes its place as part of the general struggle for socialism.

The great revolutionary teacher, Friedrich Engels, once said: “Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism.”

Workers of the World, Unite!