AT PENPOINT
PTI chief Imran Khan came up with a suggestion at his Sargodha rally over a week ago, that he had never made before that the country needed division into more provinces, and that the present divisions would form the basis for each new province. The idea is original in the sense of its being the first time that Imran has suggested any dissatisfaction with the present provincial structure, beyond the (unfulfilled) commitment to the carving out of a South Punjab province out to Punjab.
However, it is also possible that he came up with this suggestion to get back on the same page with those in the armed forces who hold similar views. While it must be acknowledged that by the time of the 1958 military takeover, the civilian politicians had brought one unit into being, and that it was a second military ruler that reversed that decision, the abolition of the provinces remains a cherished goal,
The provinces are seen as obstacles in the way of national unity. They also created the Muhajir problem. In One-Unit, Muahjirs were like everyone else, people lacking a provincial identity while having a national one. After the provinces were restored, everyone also gained a provincial identity. Except Muhajirs. They were told to be Sindhis. Even now, it should be realized, that muhajirs lack a province they can belong to. Unless they can accommodate themselves to Sindh, and Sindh accommodate them back, to the extent that they affiliate themselves to the province, the problem will continue.
It is only towards the end of the Raj that the British conjured into being the idea of India. Originally, there were three Presidencies, and native states. It was only the Mutiny which did two things. It removed the Mughal Emperor, and it created the need for a unified command. At that time, each Presidency had its own Army. After the Mutiny, India became un Empire under the Queren-Empress, and the Army was unified.
The Raj had expanded westwards, absorbing Punjab after a time trying to run it as a native state under Ranjeet Singh’s successors. The Governor-General of the Calcutta Presidency was also made Viceroy. Now the Raj became concerned about ruling. After all, the Company was abolished, and profits no longer had to be made.
The provinces had all the ‘good’ powers, like law and order, health and education, while the Calcutta Government dealt with foreign affairs (Afghanistan, Nepal, China, Burma and the Gulf States) and the native states, and issued a currency. It maintained interprovincial roads, and saw that provinces operated as uniformly as possible. The Presidencies threw off provinces, like UP (the united province of Oudh and Agra), Punjab (which in turn threw off what was then the NWFP), Bihar and Assam, all came off the Calcutta Presidency. The division of Bengal in 1905 was part of this process, but was widely protested by Hindus on sectarian grounds, because East Bengal was Muslim-majority. In fact, though the partitiob of Bengal was reversed in 1911, it still occurred in 1947 with the Partition, and today that old East Bengal is now Bangladesh.
What Imran is ignoring is that the divisions into which Pakistan’s provinces are divided, and almost purely administrative. The old Bahawalpur state was made a Punjab division, and the old Kalat state was made a Balochistan division when One Unit was broken up, and the latter has given up some territory to the new Rakhshan division, which also got some land from Qutta Division.
Imran has not apparently struck a chord among the public with this suggestion, not even among those with whom he wants to get on the same page. Only unshakeable public demand can justify the labour that would go into such a major exercise.
The story of Faisalabad division is also noticeable. It was founded in 1892 at Lyallpur, and was not just to become a commercial centre and communications hub for thecanal colony around it, but was also to became a district headquarters. When in 1981 a new division was formed, which included Toba Tek Singh and Jhang districts, it became a division. Now it is being proposed that it become a provincial headquarters. Not bad going for a city that didn’t exist 140 years ago.
Because of this, there is no divisional loyalty. Another factor preventing regional loyalties is the fact that people are largely migrants.. Residents of a city or district are rarely living in the city of their birth. There is a division of loyalty, as migrants’ children owe something both to their parents’ village, as well as their own area of residence.
However, the idea might appeal to contralizers,because breaking up the old centres of provincial loyalty is supposed to lead to a loyalty to the greater unity, the federation. Even if some Indian divisions are now states, such as the old Ambala Division now forming Haryana state, that does not provide any reason for divisions to become states. For one thing, any such scheme would lead to a plethora of linguistic problems.
Urdu is supposed to be the national language, but is the official language nowhere. That position is occupied by English. In the Punjab Assembly, for example, members ase supposed to speak in Urdu. If they wish to speak another language, including Punjabi or Seraiki, members have to seek permission from the Chair.
An example of what could happen is provided by Nigeria. It too has been under military rule, and it was military rulers which resulted in a proliferation of states. At independence in 1960 (two years after Pakistan underwent its first military coup), Nigeria consisted of three regions. Nigeria had the first of its many coups in January 1966, and from 1967 to 1970, even had a civil war which was set off by the constitution into 12 states. In 1976, seven states were added, More states kept on being added, till now (since 1996) there have been 30 states and a Federal Capital Territory. It seems that some stability has now been reached.
This is much more thorough-going an experience than India has gone. But there too the process of state-making has wider than that of Pakistan, which, apart from merging states into provinces, has only changed a name, turning the North-West Frontier Province into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Of course, there has since been an upheaval; the merging of FATA into KP.
Using the present divisions may avoid endless disputes over redrawing boundaries, but there are disparities. Punjab has eight divisions, Balochistan 10, while Sindh and KP have seven each. Using the present divisions will leave room for Punjab and Sindh to give way to provinces that themselves will look to split. Then there is the question of nomenclature. Which division will inherit the old name? Or are the present names to vanish from the map?
There will probably be more spending than now. All governors will set as their standard the goverrnors of today, qas will all CMs, CJs, Chief Secretaries and IGs. Will the divisional tier vanish, or will the districts become divisions, the tehsils districts, the subtehsils tehsils and the qanungo halqas subtehsils? All with their full staffs. Service might not get better, but rank inflation will be immense. And those who attain this inflated rank will not abate one jot or tittle of their new privileges.
Imran should have been made to realize by the FATA merger that he has proposed a rewriting of the Constitution. (How many seats do the assemblies have? How will the Election Commission be composed? The National Finance Commission? The Council of Common Interests? The Supreme Judicial Council?
Imran has not apparently struck a chord among the public with this suggestion, not even among those with whom he wants to get on the same page. Only unshakeable public demand can justify the labour that would go into such a major exercise.
