Why Are Baloch Rebels Siding With India?
Balochistan, a province long plagued by insurgency since its annexation by Pakistan in 1948, experienced a sharp rise in coordinated militant activity during the India-Pakistan conflict.
By Mark Kinra
Between May 7 and May 10, 2025, India and Pakistan engaged in one of the most intense military confrontations of the 21st century—the conflict, largely aerial, featured fighter jets, loitering munitions and missile strikes.
Pakistan launched attacks targeting both civilian and military infrastructure in India, but caused limited damage due to India’s effective use of air defense systems. In contrast, Indian forces struck multiple sites within Pakistan, reportedly destroying terror-related infrastructure and employing Israeli-made Harop drones in strikes across major cities. Among the most significant developments was the destruction of air defense installations in Lahore.
Following the strikes, Pakistan launched a barrage of drones and missiles, which India intercepted. In response, India targeted 11 Pakistani air bases, primarily located in Punjab and Sindh provinces. India’s offensive strategy deliberately excluded large-scale operations in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, although minor drone activity was reported in Peshawar. The furthest Indian strike reached Jacobabad Air Base, near the border of Balochistan and Sindh.
What Happened in Balochistan?
Balochistan, a province long plagued by insurgency since its annexation by Pakistan in 1948, experienced a sharp rise in coordinated militant activity during the India-Pakistan conflict.
According to open-source intelligence and insurgent group statements, the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), specifically the Bashir Zeb faction, launched Operation Herof 2.0. Over four days, the group claimed responsibility for 71 attacks at 51 locations across the province. Targets included military convoys, checkpoints, intelligence units, mineral transport vehicles and individuals allegedly affiliated with state-backed “death squads.”
The BLA said the operation aimed to test its military coordination, ground control and defensive positioning in preparation for future engagements. Even after the India-Pakistan skirmish ended in a cease-fire, the group claimed to have carried out seven additional attacks, bringing the total under Operation Herof 2.0 to 78 as of May 13.
Similarly, the Baloch Liberation Front (BLF), led by Dr. Allah Nazar Baloch and a member of the broader Baluch Raji Ajoi Sangar (BRAS) alliance, also carried out attacks during this period. The groups said they viewed the regional conflict as an opportunity to assert their demands and highlight Balochistan’s struggle for self-determination.
In a series of statements, the BLA declared that “a new order has become inevitable” and reiterated its claim that the Baloch people are the rightful heirs to the region. The group denounced Pakistan as a “breeding ground for terrorism” and called for support from neighboring countries including Iran, Afghanistan and India.
The BLF echoed those sentiments and questioned why the global community raises concerns about Kashmir but not Balochistan. Leaders referenced historical opposition to Pakistan’s formation by notable Islamic scholars and claimed local religious leaders in Balochistan have issued fatwas against the Pakistani state.
Both groups appealed directly to India for support, with the BLA offering to act as a “military arm” should India choose to act against Pakistan. Dr. Allah Nazar Baloch specifically requested 93,000 rifles—the same number Pakistan surrendered in the 1971 war—vowing to use them in an armed struggle.
Strategic Restraint or Tactical Messaging?
India’s decision not to carry out direct military operations in Balochistan has been interpreted by some analysts as a strategic move aimed at avoiding escalation into a broader regional war. The restraint also prevented Pakistan from justifying a harsh crackdown on Baloch militants by linking their activities directly to Indian intervention.
However, Pakistan has long accused India of covertly supporting Baloch separatist movements. These accusations have persisted despite India’s official position of non-involvement, particularly during critical moments such as the integration of princely states.
By visibly aligning with India during the skirmish and conducting high-impact operations, Baloch insurgent groups may further provoke retaliation from the Pakistani state. Whether or not India supports the Baloch cause, Pakistan is likely to continue framing the unrest as foreign-instigated, complicating the geopolitical narrative in the region.
