This is a tricky question, as there are some variables that must be considered here. First of all, the concept of insurgency has been widely used in Pakistan's media outlets to explain militancy in Balochistan. If we are to accept the premise that what was, and to some extent is, happening in Balochistan can be classified as insurgency, we need to be clear on how this word is defined. Insurgency is micro and macro, with micro level insurgency aimed at creating disturbances for a government through the use of fire arms. Macro level insurgency is out and out revolt aimed at overthrowing a government. Either way, insurgency is aimed at causing distress by one party towards another.
After this initial classification, we must look at the circumstances surrounding an insurgency because they too create a fork in the road we need to take to explain social control. Micro level insurgency that is initiated by violent nonstate actors solely for the purpose of promoting their anti state agenda is generally met with more disdain from the general public. The reason is that the people can discern the visible distress in the law and order situation and life in general in their area. They actively seek out a state centered solution to the problem.
The case is slightly different for micro or macro level insurgency where the people are the main actors in the uprising against the state. Social control in such cases becomes difficult to achieve. The recent example of protests in the USA after the death of George Floyd can be a case study here. The protests were staged against a key player in the state's quest for social control: the police. With the people in a state of deeply ingrained distrust, it becomes difficult to create incentives (positive reinforcement) or project punishment (negative reinforcement) to achieve social control.
The case of Balochistan also serves as an example. The lack of transparency from the Army and the State caused enough doubts in the minds of international organizations and local actors to incite a subdued and on many occasions vocal protest for the rights of people in the province.
With the concept of insurgence in mind, the question of social control in such a situation can be answered.
Theoretically, sociologists have tried to ascertain causes of deviant behavior (insurgence).Merton's Strain Theory, Durkheim's Theory of Anomie, Theory of Suicide all try to explain why the bond of an individual gets so weak with the society that he has to pick up weapons to make his voice heard. With these theories in mind, we can start to develop some responses.
1. In an area of insurgency or an area prone to insurgency, the state must make social integration a priority. The youth and adult susceptible to revolt must be educated about the causes of the issues and how they- the people are an asset for the country rather than in the hands of the militants.
2. In case of macro level insurgency, little or no social control is possible because it often arises as a result of failed or hostile state policies. While the protests in USA can not be categorized as an insurgency, there are some lessons to be learned. The first lesson is that in times of revolt against state, social control is the prerogative of the people as much as the state. Control over emotions and limits to protest must be exercised. However in cases of armed insurgency, it is difficult to attain control. The second lesson is that the use of public private partnerships can help develop healthy relationship between public and state. This can help create trust that can ultimately lead to public cooperation in times of unrest.
3. The media must be used as a tool to promote tolerance and pragmatism in the people. The aim is to create a wall between the public and harmful actors.
4. The best form of social control is effective governance. Transparency and rule of law are two of the major factors of good governance. No amount of media campaigns or education will work if the people clearly understand that their lives are miserable because of state policies. State policies must be centered around people not selfish interests. This creates a class of people (as is the case in Pakistan) who are constantly oppressed and only a few get their voices heard.
5. The police and justice system must have a humane response towards people. Even criminals must be treated justly not like they are treated in Pakistan.

This was a humble attempt to explain your query. I hope it helps!!