In an unprecedented attack, Baloch nationalist separatists hijacked a moving passenger train in southwestern Pakistan on March 11 and took more than 400 passengers of the Jaffar Express hostage.
After nearly 30 hours, Pakistan’s military announced on the evening of March 12 that security forces had rescued more than 300 hostages in a counter-operation. However, on March 14, the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), which took responsibility for the attack, claimed it had executed 214 captives. The conflicting statements highlight the longstanding challenge of independently verifying information in Balochistan, where both the militants and the state impede the free flow of information.
The attack once again triggered debate in Pakistan – not over massive security failures or the province’s long-standing grievances, but rather on why the Baloch civil rights movement and its leadership do not publicly condemn the BLA.
A Surge in Violence and Pressure on the Baloch Yekjehti Committee
Balochistan, Pakistan’s largest but most volatile province, has long been a scene of violent separatist insurgency and ethnic tensions. However, the scale and intensity of militant attacks have surged in recent years. Observers say Pakistan’s military strategy, which prioritizes force over addressing underlying political and economic grievances through dialogue, has aggravated the insurgency and deepened ethnic tensions.
A familiar pattern keeps repeating after every major attack by Baloch insurgents. Instead of addressing security lapses or the root causes of Balochistan’s political crisis, Pakistani politicians and journalists shift the debate elsewhere, calling on the Baloch Yekjehti Committee (BYC), a civil rights movement advocating for Baloch rights, and its leadership to publicly condemn the militants.
The Jaffar Express hijacking has once again placed Dr. Mahrang Baloch, the organizer of BYC, in the spotlight. Yet rights activists say that such demands are merely an attempt to sweep the real issues — years of political marginalization, human rights abuses, and economic neglect in Balochistan — under the carpet.
Indeed, the organized media and political campaign to get the BYC to condemn BLA attacks suggests a hidden motive: delegitimizing the group and its leadership globally.
Within two years, the BYC has gained global recognition, with Dr. Mahrang Baloch being listed among TIME Magazine’s 100 emerging leaders and named by BBC World among its 100 most influential women of 2024. A renowned Norwegian social scientist nominated her for the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize. Rights watchdog Civicus added Pakistan to the Civicus Monitor’s human rights watchlist, clearly mentioning the government’s continuous harassment of Mahrang Baloch. The offices of the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the European Union continue to raise concerns with the Pakistani government about the crackdown on the BYC and Dr. Baloch’s security.
The BYC’s sudden rise also poses a serious challenge to the state narrative in Balochistan. This is why after every lethal attack by Baloch armed groups, the entire state machinery becomes active in targeting Dr. Baloch and discrediting her movement.
Still, the question remains: Why doesn’t the BYC openly condemn the BLA’s violent actions?
Mahrang Baloch responded to the criticism with a lengthy post on X:
More than three dozen people were extrajudicially killed in Balochistan in the first three months of 2025. Still, we do not merely give condemnations [of violence and attacks]. Instead, we protest against this blatant barbarism and lawlessness and demand justice and accountability. Because we know that condemnation is nothing but a pretence, which neither solves longstanding issues nor ensures justice. Instead, it gives a clean chit to the powerful rulers of this country, who have no respect for rule of law, ethics, or human rights. They tend to hide behind the curtain of condemnation to cover up their failures, oppression, and brutality. Only when the rule of law is enforced, and a proper mechanism of accountability is put in place will injustice and oppression stop. But here, instead of delivering justice, everyone is asked to issue a condemnation, in order to divert attention from real issues so that the state can hide its incompetence and failure.
… I appeal to the Baloch nation not to succumb to pressure from those elements sitting outside Balochistan who never see the oppression, repression, and killings being perpetrated on the Baloch, but they come… to demand outright condemnation.
This does not mean the BYC endorses or supports violent tactics. Many within the BYC say, however, that reducing the discussion to only condemnations of BLA attacks overshadows the deep, systemic grievances that fuel the insurgency. As the Baloch conundrum deepens, the central government of Pakistan should focus on addressing the root causes of the conflict rather than demanding condemnations from victims of violence and the families of disappeared.
What Makes It Difficult for BYC to Condemn the BLA?
Since the BLA is in direct confrontation with the state and claims its targets are military personnel, it becomes even more challenging for a local movement like the BYC to respond. The BLA and Pakistan’s military generally issue statements that differ enormously in describing the number and identity (civilian or military) of the victims of each attack.
As a grassroots civil rights movement, the BYC lacks the resources to verify whether each BLA attack targets civilians or military personnel. More than that, it also faces internal challenges, as some of its supporters, who are direct victims of state violence, sympathize with armed groups.
In that context, in the midst of deep uncertainty and conflicting accounts, condemning BLA actions risks strengthening state narratives that politicize and undermine Balochistan’s genuine issues, which can ultimately delegitimize the broader Baloch struggle.
Following each lethal attacks by Baloch armed groups, the state’s propaganda machinery, along with politicians notorious for their involvement in human rights violations in Balochistan, become suddenly active in condemning such incidents, often with little regard for facts. A few well-known Baloch journalists, who remain silent on state violence, mass disappearances, and extrajudicial killings in Balochistan, also suddenly become active following BLA attacks and join politicians not only in condemning the BLA but also in demanding condemnations from others.
In fact, it seems that condemning Baloch armed groups has become a political competition now. Some do it to remain in the military’s good books, while others use it as a distraction. Even international players, including Western diplomatic missions such as the U.S. embassy and the EU, now join in condemning Baloch armed groups – all while remaining silent on the repression of peaceful Baloch activists.
It is absolutely fine to condemn Baloch armed groups, but it is equally important not to ignore the state policies in Balochistan that have caused the insurgency in the first place. Condemnation of violence should be applied consistently, including when the BYC’s right to peaceful assembly is denied, its members are targeted, or when dozens of Baloch are disappeared in one week and are later killed in alleged fake police encounters.
Powerful actors ally themselves for political purposes or to secure Pakistani cooperation on issues like the deportation of Afghan refugees. The BYC chooses to stand with the victims of state repression in Balochistan rather than join in selective condemnations demanded by external forces, who are completely ignorant to Baloch suffering.
Widespread Local Sympathies for the BLA
Another possible reason for the BYC’s silence could be that the BLA enjoys widespread local support, particularly among people who have suffered directly at the hands of the state. This reality makes the BYC’s position more difficult. While the BYC itself is a steadfastly non-violent movement, openly condemning the BLA could alienate a large segment of the population that views armed resistance as the only viable response to state actions. Other nationalist groups in Balochistan also avoid clearcut condemnation of the BLA for the same reason. Engaging in public criticism could weaken their support and risk provoking an armed group with enormous local sympathy.
Compared to other nationalist groups, the BYC enjoys a greater degree of political independence and broader support. However, the realities on the ground – the widespread sympathy for the BLA among locals due to state violence, the blurred lines between civilian and military targets, and the state’s continuous manipulation of genuine issues such as enforced disappearances – make it hard for the BYC to condemn Baloch insurgency.
In this volatile situation, the BYC must prioritize its core mission, which is to peacefully advocate for the Baloch people’s political, social, and human rights rather than succumbing to external pressures demanding selective condemnations. Condemnations do not change the realities on the ground and will not deter the BLA unless state changes its Balochistan policy.
The BYC has repeatedly said it opposes violence, and Dr. Baloch’s tweets and statements are on the record in this regard. But the repeated demand to condemn every attack by the BLA signals something else. The BYC and Dr. Baloch must be very careful because their power and strength come from local Baloch people facing state wrath and living in Balochistan, not from people sitting in Islamabad or the West.