US opposes independent Balochistan


WASHINGTON: The United States has made it clear that it does not support the idea of an independent Balochistan and respects Pakistan’s territorial integrity.
The question of the alleged US involvement was raised at the State Department briefing on Tuesday afternoon where spokesperson Jen Psaki said she had seen media reports suggesting that “we had been engaged with Balochistan” and promised to release an official statement on the issue.
On Wednesday, the State Department issued a statement, making it clear that “the United States respects the territorial integrity of Pakistan. It is not the policy of the administration to support independence for Balochistan.”
The question raised at the briefing also referred to a recent statement by a Republican Congressman Louie Gohmert, suggesting that the United States should help Balochistan become a separate state.
“We are aware of Representative Gohmert’s comments. Members of Congress express a wide range of views. Such comments do not in any way imply US government endorsement,” said the State Department while distancing itself from Mr Gohmert’s position on the issue.
In a recent interview, Mr Gohmert suggested that to resolve the Afghanistan crisis, it’s better to have a separate Balochistan carved out of Pakistan.
Mr Gohmert’s statement followed President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address last month, emphasising the need for US disengagement from Afghanistan.
The Republican Congressman interpreted the speech as an admission of defeat in Afghanistan and proposed a two-point formula for turning this possible defeat into victory: supply more arms to the Northern Alliance and a new state within the borders of Pakistan.
“Let’s talk about creating a Balochistan in the southern part of Pakistan,” Mr Gohmert told The Huffington Post. “They love us. They’ll stop the IEDs [improvised explosive devices] and all the weaponry coming into Afghanistan, and we got a shot to win over there.”
The White House did not respond to requests for comments on Mr Gohmert’s statement
http://www.dawn.com/news/1086620/us-...nt-balochistan

We need to read between the lines and understand the message of US. US doesn't oppose instead it has proposed independent Balochistan. Their interference is with a purpose and carries a long history.


http://www.dawn.com/news/761991/balo...d-us-elections

http://www.dawn.com/news/696385/us-d...tan-resolution

http://www.dawn.com/news/696345/us-b...an-sovereignty

http://www.dawn.com/news/693453/us-c...e-for-pakistan

http://www.dawn.com/news/714664/indi...ochistan-saeed

i agree with that all and it is shameful for those who want independent Baluchistan after separation of east pakistan we and they have paid enough cost now it shouldn't happened once again.

__________________
So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny?
[Mussawar Ali]

Its not of todays thing, US including different lobbies in US, has been nurturing and supporting the insurgent elements from Balochistan. They live there, arrange meetings there, get money from there and list goes on.

Interest of US　to have presence in Balochistan is not linked with the issue of Afghanistan only, it also want to keep an eye on Iran and want to stop China's inroads (say Gawadar).

Another aspect is the resources in Balochistan. US went to Iraq because of its resources and they can try to come here on the same pretext of WMD. One may watch J.I Joe, where their force attacks Pakistan to safe its nuclear arsenal going to rogue elements..


Allah hi Allah hy...

Rahay naam Allah ka. amin...

mad:

Regards

__________________
'Thee woh ik shakhs kay tasawar saay - abb woh ranayee khayal kahaan'

Just a question out of curiosity, why are even we interested in knowing that, whether US oppose or propose independant Balochistan?
We should be interested in knowing why we have discriminated against them, the Balochs, when there was a matter of providing basic facilities(education, health, communication infrastructure etc.) that other(most, if not all) parts of country have had been enjoying. Why they have been socially cut off? Why we smell conspiracies whenever anyone among them come forth to raise voice for their due rights? Why we can't go to Balochistan for......? and so on.
There are so many "whys" that come to mind when we think about Balochistan, but unfortunately we are only interested in those "whys" that relate to countries not Pakistan. We should put our own house in order first and only then should start worrying about "what others think or do".

AOA brother,

I will try to answer your question , have a look at this column published in todays Jang http://jang.com.pk/jang/feb2014-dail...2014/col1.html

Secondly, I like watching movies, and some movies I like so much that I use to watch them for many times. One of such movie is Sarfarosh, where Amir Khan is an ACP in Crime Branch Mumbai and he encounters with rogue elements supported by Pakistan's ISI etc. One of the dialogues after start of the movie is conversation between a major and general in ISI HQ of Pakistan, where major comes late and general ask why are you late, he says,

Major; Sir I am late but I brought a big news

General: carry own.

Major: look at these newspapers

General: what is it, wow troubles in India

Major: yes sir

General; who is doing it

Major: One veeran

General: where is his place

Major: this is Mumbai, and this is his place

General: what is his problem

Major; not much, but we have created problems

General; good luck, we need to create more of such problems

....

To conclude, I can say that we are linked with other countries for all purposes and our problems and successes are also somehow linked with other countries as well. .

Regards

__________________
'Thee woh ik shakhs kay tasawar saay - abb woh ranayee khayal kahaan'

First off, I'd like to have a few words on conspiracies. Conspiracies do exist but here's another closely related fact: conspiracies, just like the concept of terrorism, are relative. Conspiracy against one nation is struggle for supremacy of another nation. Now there is no denying to the fact that a powerful country would indulge in all sorts of conspiracies to maintain its supremacy. In some cases, the subjugated people then resort to their own freedom which is often termed as terrorism.

I think no one can deny the fact that the CIA has wreaked havoc in many countries through "conspiracies" (although a different word should be used; mention to this word generally takes away the good sense). We have ample examples of this.

Interests clash and thus conspiracies exist and that is perfectly natural. But it is solely the responsibility of the affected to deal with the conspiracies and make them ineffective. This can be very effectively done on diplomatic front by bringing forth the evidence and so forth. Is Pakistan so impotent that it can't even bring forth the evidence of these foreign interventions and demand justice, even though the evidence supposedly exists? The concept of a nation counting and existing on the benevolence of others is quite incomprehensible.

Now to Baluchistan. Are there any indicators of foreign support to the insurgent movement? Yes. What is Pakistan doing about it (other than killing activists and dumping them in mass graves)? Nothing. Should we accept anything good out of all this? There is no reason for that. If we want the insurgency fail and Baluchistan back in the fold of nation, we will have to act in a sensible way, which we are not. We are pretty much repeating what we did in Bangladesh, only Baluchistan is unfortunate of having a meager population and thus unable to retaliate like Bangladesh. It's funny we cry about the injustices in Bangladesh and that we should not repeat them and yet look how many people were out to support Mama Qadeer in Lahore.