Daily Times

Pakistan is composed of four provinces, namely Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan. Punjab contains more than 60 percent of the country’s population; Balochistan is the largest in terms of territory and smallest in population. Each of these provinces has a legislature, a governor, a chief minister and his cabinet of ministers, and secretaries to the government in various departments. There is debate once again whether territories of some of them should be carved out to create new provinces. The division of an existing province to create a new one is demanded by the people or the dominant elite in certain cases. There is the demand, for instance, that districts in southern Punjab, where Seraiki is spoken, should be taken out of Punjab and made into a separate province. Spokesmen for Bahawalpur and its adjoining districts contend that even though their people speak Seraiki, their territory has historically been a distinct unit of governance and administration and its status as such should be revived. In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa the notables in Hazara and its neighbourhood, who speak Hindko and not Pushto that the Pashtuns speak, want this area to be made a separate province.

In Balochistan the Pashtuns occupy contiguous areas adjoining Afghanistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Given the option, they may like to be joined with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. But this option is not available to them. The Baloch politicians, particularly the Baloch nationalists, would strongly oppose the ‘vivisection’ of their province. The Urdu-speaking people constitute a large proportion of the population in Karachi and other urban centres of Sindh. The Sindhi-speaking people make up the large majority in the interior. But there is only a subdued demand in certain quarters for splitting the province on linguistic lines. In any case, we may be sure that the ‘old Sindhis’ would sternly oppose it. The Pashtuns are not as strongly opposed to the establishment of a Hindko-speaking province. The Punjabi-speaking people do not object to the emergence of one or more Seraiki-speaking provinces (Multan and Bahawalpur).

It is then possible, perhaps even likely, that in the foreseeable future Punjab will be divided into three and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa into two provinces. In that event, Pakistan will be composed of seven provinces. One or more constitutional amendments will have to be made if any of the existing provinces are to be split and new ones created. This should not be difficult to accomplish if the major political parties in the country are receptive to these changes. It should be noted that Pakistan being a federal union, its component units have equal representation in the Senate. It is probable that the Seraiki-speaking people are bilingual and can speak Punjabi. Likewise, the Hindko-speaking people may know Pushto. With the creation of the new provinces there will be three times Punjabi-knowing and twice as many Pushto-knowing persons in the Senate as they are now.

Beyond ethic and linguistic glorification, certain practical considerations have called for the division of provinces. It is true that an ordinary peasant in Pakpattan almost never has business to transact with public officials in Lahore. But large landowners and other influential persons in the area do. It is expensive and even otherwise cumbersome for them to travel to Lahore. Life would be easier for them if their business could be handled in nearby Multan. On the other hand, there is the fact that Multan will need many billions of rupees to operate as a province, which its people will have to provide by means of higher taxes than the ones they pay as residents of united Punjab.

I have known individuals who, 15 or so years ago, were possessed of intense Punjabi patriotism. They were proud of being Punjabis, and any talk of splitting their beloved Punjab would have split their hearts. But I imagine they would have respected a community’s right to self-determination. Consider also that while love includes the desire to posses, it also implies willingness to let go if the other side wants to part company. If the Seraiki-speaking people want to separate from them and create an identity of their own, these Punjabi patriots should not want to stand in the way. Moreover, men from Jhelum, Lahore, and Khanewal, those who matter, can still meet, have tea together, chat about world affairs, and have fun. So far as they are concerned nothing has been lost as a result of carving new provinces out of Punjab.

There can be no objection to the formation of political togetherness on the basis of ethnic or linguistic affinities. But where does this quest stop? In terms of their social organisation, customs and traditions, the people living in Sahiwal are not quite the same as those in Gujrat. That should not be taken to mean that they cannot be part of the same province. Consider also that no two individuals can be exactly alike. If the logic of self-determination is pushed too far, society will dissolve and chaos will prevail. We must learn to be at ease with diversity and complexity, for they are the inescapable ingredients of civility.

Any provincial reorganisation that does materialise should go well with the status of Pakistan as a state and nation. Accompanied by the extensive transfer of powers and functions to the provinces envisaged by the 18th Amendment to the constitution, expected to be completed by the middle of 2012, it may serve to diminish the estrangement that some of the counter-elite in Sindh and Balochistan have felt towards Pakistan whom they have tended to regard as a cover for Punjabi domination. Needless to say, the Punjabi elite will have to devise ways of spreading Pakistani patriotism to those who have been estranged.

The writer, professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, is a visiting professor at the Lahore School of Economics. He can be reached at anwarsyed@cox.net