In March 2025, Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) leader Dr. Mahrang Baloch stated she had been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Publicized by separatist quarters and liberal media outlets, the news fueled international interest. The truth behind the claim, however, is cloudy at best, and lethal at worst. In reality, Dr. Baloch is anything but the peacemaker her foreign patrons make her out to be. Her association with separatist groups and omission of terrorism reveal her to be an agent of extremist networks and not a true human rights activist.
Born in 1993, Mahrang Baloch gained fame after her father, Abdul Ghaffar Langove, a documented commander of the illegal Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), vanished in 2011. Although she holds the Pakistani state responsible, authorities claim Langove perished in internal militant fighting. This incident served as the catalyst for her activism, traditionally framed as a nonviolent struggle for justice. In truth, her campaign has always gone hand-in-hand with anti-state narratives, supporting allegations of enforced disappearances and playing down, or even ignoring, the BLA’s history of terrorist activities.
Mahrang co-founded BYC, an organization that has masterminded mass protests, sit-ins, and giant marches. Although these activities may seem harmless, security agencies claim BYC is a front for separatist insurgency. The organization systematically demonizes Pakistani law enforcement but is eerily quiet about BLA terrorism, which involves killing civilians, teachers, and security officials. Intelligence sources have rightly marked BYC as a “terrorist proxy,” with accusations of fomenting disorder in the name of advocating for human rights. For a self-proclaimed peace activist, Baloch’s one-sided criticism of state actions and failure to criticize terrorist groups is illuminating, and disturbing.
In March 2025, one Baloch journalist in Norway, Kiyya Baloch, took to social media stating that Mahrang was one of 338 Nobel Peace Prize nominees. No one was named as the nominator. Shortly thereafter, Mahrang herself verified the assertion on X (previously Twitter) as being “honored” but steered the focus back to “the thousands of forcibly disappeared Baloch.” It was a masterfully constructed statement intended to cover up the lack of credibility with emotional appeal.
Yet, the Nobel Committee never verifies nominees, a secrecy practice lasting 50 years. There was no verification by official statement, no announcement of support by esteemed nominators, and no outside verification. Indeed, Nobel officials discourage announcements of nominations for political purposes. Without disclosure of who nominated her, the announcement looks more like a propaganda device than an authentic recognition.
Activist-led news outlets such as The Balochistan Post and global platforms such as UNPO latched onto the story, celebrating Mahrang’s alleged nomination as a win for repressed peoples. Indian publications also picked up on the story, clearly hopeful to highlight a tale embarrassing Pakistan. Even established international media such as The Diplomat and Arab News, however, hesitated to describe her statement as anything more than an individual claim, rather than an established fact. The phrase “says she has been nominated” dominated the headlines, even from neutral sources, showing skepticism.
To be precise, a Nobel Peace Prize nomination does not signify approval or sanction by the Nobel Institute. Anyone can be put forward by some qualifying individuals, a parliamentarian, academician, or peace laureate. Not knowing who has nominated her and why, the assertion is of no weight whatsoever. The chasm between being shortlisted and merely being nominated is enormous, and Dr. Baloch’s fans have conveniently blurred that distinction for maximum PR mileage.
This is an old trick. There are countless people throughout history who have used the fiction of a Nobel nomination to become politically powerful. In Mahrang’s case, the story was skillfully spun: present her as a Baloch Malala, a female voice raised in protest against oppression. But unlike Malala Yousafzai, whose nomination was supported by credible individuals and institutions, Mahrang’s is based on the testimony of her own supporters. Malala unequivocally denounced extremism. Mahrang does not. That’s an important difference.
Dr. Baloch’s silence on BLA terrorism is not just problematic, it is deliberate. Over the past two decades, Balochistan has suffered from an armed insurgency marked by bombings, assassinations, and mass killings by groups like the BLA and BLF. Pakistani soldiers, teachers, and laborers have died in these attacks. Yet Mahrang has never issued a single public condemnation of these acts. Her outrage is selective. Her activism is politicized. Her “human rights” work is biased to condemn the state and provide cover to the insurgents.
Extraneous sympathizers claim that Dr. Baloch’s voice is the voice of the people being persecuted. But a peace prize candidate must stand against violence unequivocally, on all sides. She does not. She goes out of her way to highlight tales of alleged state abuse while wiping off the victims of Baloch separatist violence. That is not neutrality; that is complicity.
Moreover, her work is recognized very less internationally. She featured in BBC’s “100 Women” and TIME’s “Next Leaders” lists in past years, prizes that often reflect media fads rather than actual contributions in the world. Though she is a name in activist circles, she is not very well known in mainstream humanitarian debates and discourse. Unlike Edhi or Malala, where work reached the global level, Mahrang’s influence is limited and highly controversial.
If Pakistan’s favorite humanitarian, Abdul Sattar Edhi, could be nominated and fail to get the Nobel Prize, one has to wonder seriously about the worth of someone like Mahrang Baloch, whose major contribution is organizing protests for a cause whose ideas closely reflect those of separatist militants. Her nomination, should it have taken place at all, seems like more of a symbolic gesture on the part of a sympathizer than an actual endorsement of peacebuilding.
Ultimately, Dr. Mahrang Baloch’s claim to a Nobel nomination is unsubstantiated, bereft of backing from any credible nominator, and conveniently self-advertised. More significantly, it runs the risk of exploiting a prestigious international accolade for propaganda purposes related to separatism. The international community should be cautious about confusing meticulously cultivated activism, biased, politicized, and tainted by selective silence concerning terrorism, as authentic peace activism.
Until there is honesty, authentic verification, and a firm position against every kind of violence, Dr. Mahrang Baloch is not a peacemaker, but a divisive force whose ambition to claim the world’s most revered peace award is empty.
Author
