The Geopolitical Chessboard: Why the US Blocked UN Terror Sanctions Against BLA and Majeed Brigade

In a move that has sent ripples through the international counter-terrorism landscape, the United States recently exercised its diplomatic muscle at the United Nations, blocking a joint proposal by Pakistan and China to designate the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and its fearsome offshoot, the Majeed Brigade, as global terrorist organizations.

This decision has ignited a fiery debate, raising pointed questions about Washington's seemingly contradictory stance, especially given that the BLA itself was designated a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) entity by the US in 2019.

The BLA, a separatist militant group operating primarily in Pakistan's resource-rich Balochistan province, has long been a source of regional instability.

Its 'Majeed Brigade' is notorious for carrying out high-profile, often suicide, attacks targeting Pakistani security forces and, significantly, Chinese interests and personnel associated with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The recent push by Islamabad and Beijing to list these groups under the UN's sanctions regime, which would impose an asset freeze, travel ban, and arms embargo, was a strategic move to garner international consensus against these threats.

Pakistan has consistently presented dossiers highlighting the BLA's atrocities, often accusing India of backing the group to destabilize the region and undermine CPEC projects.

China, with its significant investments in Balochistan's Gwadar Port and other CPEC initiatives, has a direct economic and security interest in curbing the Majeed Brigade's activities, especially after multiple attacks directly targeting Chinese engineers and workers.

However, the US, through its representative in the UN Security Council's 1267 Al Qaeda and ISIL Sanctions Committee, put a technical hold on the proposal.

This move immediately sparked outrage and confusion. How could Washington, which itself officially recognizes the BLA as a terror organization, prevent its global designation? Critics are quick to point out the perceived hypocrisy, suggesting a nuanced, or perhaps politically motivated, approach to counter-terrorism, where designations are not always clear-cut.

One prevailing theory suggests that the US's reluctance stems from a desire to maintain strategic flexibility in the region.

By not fully sanctioning the BLA at the UN level, some analysts argue, Washington might be attempting to avoid alienating certain factions or to keep its options open in a complex geopolitical environment where Balochistan's resources and strategic location hold significant sway. There's also speculation about potential Indian lobbying, as New Delhi often views Pakistan's accusations of Indian support for the BLA as propaganda, and some hardliners might see any group opposing Pakistan as a potential asset.

The US State Department's designation of the BLA in 2019 notably cited the group's responsibility for multiple terrorist attacks, including the 2018 attack on the Chinese Consulate in Karachi and the 2019 attack on a luxury hotel in Gwadar, which housed Chinese nationals.

The current blockage at the UN, therefore, creates a perplexing dichotomy: the US acknowledges the BLA's terrorist actions yet seemingly protects it from broader international sanctions. This raises fundamental questions about the consistency of global counter-terrorism efforts and the selective application of terror designations based on perceived national interests rather than universal principles.

The repercussions of this US roadblock are significant.

It risks undermining the credibility of the UN sanctions regime and potentially emboldening groups like the BLA and Majeed Brigade. Furthermore, it complicates counter-terrorism cooperation between the US, Pakistan, and China, fostering distrust and cynicism. As geopolitical tensions continue to simmer, especially between the US and China, such diplomatic maneuvers underscore the intricate and often contradictory nature of international relations, where security concerns are frequently intertwined with strategic competition.