Why Doesn’t Pakistan Have New Provinces?
There is no second opinion on the matter that Pakistan was envisaged by the founding fathers as a strong federal state. They understood the gravity of communal and regional differences in this region and hoped that the nascent country would be a federation where all groups would enjoy their due rights with equality and freedom. Federalism also remained a persistent part of All India Muslim Leagues’ politics throughout the decades of constitutional reforms in British India. However, as Pakistan came into being, these notions started to diminish gradually due to acute political turmoil, civil upset, and economic disorder. Some say that the idea was deliberately obscured by the ruling elite who never wanted to let go of the powers from their hands. The founding party i.e. All India Muslim League was subsequently subdued by witty bureaucrats, strong military officers, opportunist landlords, and giant businessmen. It must be borne in mind that owing to repeated failures of the federal system, Pakistan could not hold its eastern wing and the result was the East Pakistan debacle. It is an irony that even after five decades of separation of Bangladesh, Pakistan seems to have learned nothing from this bitter incident. The demands of autonomy for existing provinces and the creation of new provinces are still there. They are often deliberated but rarely acted upon. The country has made inadequate progress in strengthening the federation and turning the dream of the founding fathers into reality.
What could be the justification for not making new provinces in a country where 220 million people live in only four provinces with acute inequality in the distribution of resources, opportunities, and facilities?
The basic idea of federalism calls for the creation of new and small federating units if the population is culturally diverse, economically deprived, ethnically distinct, socially regressive, but emotionally connected to one notion of nationality. Plus, a strong federation also becomes a necessity when there exist threats of external conspiracies like the ones we face from both our Eastern and Western borders. It needs to be recalled that the thirteen states of the US merged into the American federation soon after their experiment of confederation failed because they perceived the threat of British aggression. Lastly, the desire of regions to integrate is crucial and needs to be preserved; if this desire perishes, nothing else can hold the regions together. History tells that when countries lose the confidence of their populations, they become vulnerable to disintegration.
Federalism provides the best structure to blend all the aspirations of autonomy without affecting national unity. Pakistan’s current federal structure seems to be lacking this feature. Issues that are counted as impeding factors for the smooth working of the federation are lack of representation, issue of language, unequal resources and development, centralization of power, and uncertainty regarding the amount of autonomy each province has.
If ethnic, lingual, cultural, or historic factors are taken into consideration, there are numerous examples in this region where countries carved out new federating units based on these factors. Afghanistan, for instance, has 34 provinces exhibiting a rough ethnic division throughout the country; though the power lies with the center and the local leadership. India inherited 11 provinces from the British in 1947 and immediately started redefining its states’ boundaries in the subsequent years. For instance, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh were created on the lingual basis, and Uttar Pradesh on a geographic basis. Goa remained a small separate state of India owing to its distinct history. Recently, in 2014, the country created Telangana state largely on a cultural basis. Whereas in Pakistan, none of these bases could serve as a compelling factor for creating new provinces.
It is argued that the ideal time for creating new provinces on an ethnic, lingual, or cultural basis has gone and now such division is likely to create new challenges for Pakistan. Political leaders take it as an onerous task involving huge investments, extensive division of resources, and broad constitutional changes. It is further anticipated that such division may become a disintegrating factor; the rise of new political leaders from new provinces would question the existing status quo by demanding their share of power, privileges, and resources. Therefore, the policymakers and the ruling elite show reluctance on creating new provinces on an ethnic or lingual basis.
Nonetheless, if minor changes are made in the existing administrative structure, much of the issues can be resolved. If policymakers fear that drawing ethnic lines can culminate in Pakistan’s dismemberment then why don’t they consider creating new administrative units with the sole intent of improving the governance and administration of a particular region? After all, there are many regions in Pakistan demanding special care and attention.
New and small administrative setups will directly promote good governance by improving the mechanism of accountability. They can enhance the collection and reinvestment of revenue with fewer chances of mismanagement. Making and implementation of policies will become easier. Apart from that, this will ensure better services for the citizens in other domains of life too. This will also bring the seat of the government closer to the citizens. For instance, Gwadar is nearly 1000 km away from Quetta, and one has to travel for a day or two to get to the provincial headquarters for several purposes that are only addressed there. People will be better off with the creation of new urban zones including education and healthcare institutes. Afterward, the regions will get developed and attract private investments too. Intra provincial migrations, due to lack of services and opportunities, will also stop.
There are too many stakeholders in this issue and their views can hardly converge. It is historically seen that the Administrative readjustment plans could not get popular support as the ruling elite never actively endorses them. The political leadership does not accept anything that devalues their power and authority in a particular region. Power-sharing is simply not in their genes.
The sense of deprivation and unfulfillment in the people of different provinces is now elevating the demands for new provinces. It must be clearly understood that such demands cannot be easily quashed. Hence, they need to be dealt with neutrality and prudence. Shrewd administrative divisions are the need of Pakistan. Lack of distributive justice is prone to create a trust deficit among the populations of underdeveloped provinces and would ultimately result in loss of trust in government. The existing structure has now started appearing unreasonable, and it needs to be revised. The time has come when the policymakers have to pay heed to this lingering issue. The political leaders cannot buy more time. Whatever the hurdles are, they need to be crossed before the demands become more aggressive.
