Hello everyone how's life? I wanted to ask something, why is there this weird link between the Baluch and kurds but they live a whole plate apart, is it exaggerated or there is some ancient link between the two groups.
It starts with
____
*I think Balochistan was annexed*
This is a common debate between many intellects from both sides Was balochistan annexed or asseneded with a free concious decesion?
Well to uncover the reality and answers to this obession many neighbours of the state of pakistan and the Baloch subject to it have first we have to analyze the trail of documments linking the British, the Khan of kalat and the messy new state of Pakistan together.
The standstill agreement
This aggrement was made in a round table confrence in Delhi on August 4, 1947 just days before the offical partition the confrence was held between The future leaders of pakistan and The leaders os the Khanate of Kalat, (It was officially finalized and announced to the public on August 11, 1947.) There were many recognizable hands present in this agrement such as:
Lord Louis Mountbatten As the last Viceroy of British India and the Crown Representative, Mountbatten presided over the meeting. His role was to mediate and oversee the transfer of power.
Signatories for the Future State of Pakistan were one of it’s first leaders and probably first to be assassinated in pakistan:
Mohammad Ali Jinnah The founder of Pakistan signed the agreement on behalf of the incoming Government of Pakistan.
Liaquat Ali Khan Pakistan's first Prime Minister also co-signed alongside Jinnah.
Signatories for the Khanate of Kalat were again impressive faces:
Mir Ahmad Yar Khan The Khan of Kalat was present at the conference fighting for his state's sovereignty.
Sultan Ahmed (or the Khan's Prime Minister) The Chief Minister/Prime Minister or the legal advisors of Kalat signed on behalf of the Khanate.
The aggrement in full truth stated:
The Government of Pakistan recognizes Kalat State as an independent Sovereign State in treaty relations with the British Government, with a status different from that of Indian States.
Legal opinion will be sought as to whether or not agreements of leases between the British Government and Kalat will be inherited by the Pakistan Government.
When this opinion has been received, further meetings will take place between representatives of Pakistan and the Khan of Kalat at Karachi.
Meanwhile, a Standstill Agreement has been made between Pakistan and Kalat.
Discussions will take place between Pakistan and Kalat at Karachi at an early date with a view to reaching decisions on Defence, External Affairs and communications.
While there could be many interpetations made from this texts the two main are the The Nationalist Argument and then The State's Counter-Argument.
The De Jure (By Law) Argument: Clause 1 is the holy grail. The future government of Pakistan explicitly put in writing that Kalat was an "independent Sovereign State" and that its status was "different from that of Indian States." To activists, this proves that Kalat was not supposed to be treated like a typical princely state forced to choose between India and Pakistan.
The De Facto (In Practice) Argument: Clauses 4 and 5 are what the central government focused on. A "Standstill Agreement" is traditionally a temporary measure designed to keep the mail running, the borders open, and trade moving until a final merger takes place. They argue that Clause 5, which mentions making decisions on Defense and Foreign Affairs, implies that Kalat was always intended to be integrated into the security umbrella of Pakistan.
but then after independence in August 1947, the Khan of Kalat established a bicameral parliament (the Dar-ul-Awam and Dar-ul-Umra). In December 1947, the parliament met to debate joining Pakistan.
This is where nationalist leader Mir Ghaus Bakhsh Bizenjo delivered his historic speech, arguing that Balochistan shared a religion with Pakistan but that didn't mean it had to surrender its sovereignty. He famously argued: "We can die on the parched sands of our desert, but we cannot sell our freedom."
The Kalat Parliament voted overwhelmingly against accession, choosing instead to negotiate a treaty as an independent neighbor, just as the Standstill Agreement had originally hinted.
____
Recognizing that the Khan's parliament wouldn't budge, Pakistan’s central government shifted its strategy from diplomacy to geopolitical engineering.
The Khanate of Kalat was technically a suzerain over three smaller feudatory states: Kharan, Las Bela, and Makran.
but the princes of these regions DID NOT OWN THE LAND Under the traditional Baloch tribal structure and customary law, a Sardar, Mir, or Nawab is not an absolute autocrat.
The leader does not "own" the collective tribal territories (Tuman). The land belongs to the tribe communally for grazing, resources, and heritage
The chieftain's authority is political and judicial—they are a mediator, a military commander, and a custodian of honor. They have the mandate to defend the land, but they absolutely do not possess the legal right under customary law to alienate, sell, or sign away that land to a foreign entity without the collective consensus (Jirga) of the tribe.
In international law, there is a fundamental maxim: "Nemo dat quod non habet"—which translates to "No one can give what they do not have."
The British took traditional tribal chiefs and artificially inflated their powers, effectively turning them into feudal landlords and administrative puppets of the Crown.
When Pakistan accepted the signatures of these Princes in 1948, they were relying on a fake, colonial-era definition of ownership. They treated the rulers like European kings, completely ignoring the fact that under indigenous law, the rulers had zero authority to alienate tribal land.
The ultimate defense for the legality of the merger relies on the presence of the Khan of Kalat’s signature on the Instrument of Accession dated March 27, 1948. However, international jurisprudence firmly establishes that consent obtained under duress carries no legal validity. The historical timeline reveals a direct causal link between military coercion and political submission.
On March 26, 1948, units of the Pakistan Army's 7th Baluch Regiment were deployed to the coastal towns of Jiwani and Pasni, effectively initiating a military blockade. Confronted with an imminent armed invasion and complete geographic isolation, the Khan signed the document the very next day. This 24-hour window exposes the 'voluntary' accession as a geopolitical capitulation. Under established principles of international law, an agreement extracted through the threat of military force is void ab initio. The Khan’s signature was not an act of free association, but a survival tactic under acute military duress.
____
So what do you guys think?
So yesterday was my alevels exams and I quetta's center is in iqra and these mfs had sealed the cantt it was so bad they wouldn't let me through even with my "cantt pass" and even then there was such intensive checking even opening car doors without permission I had to show my SOE CNIC cantt pass to even let through the checkpost
And then after my exam my ride wasn't allowed in again I had to walk from iqra to jinnah checkpost all cuz these mfs think they're superior to the locals, flipping brown colonizers