New Provinces: Promise or Peril?

Pakistan’s path to stability lies not in division, but in strengthening local governance, ensuring equitable resource distribution, and fostering inclusive politics.

Come what may, Sindh will never support this stupid idea

Dr. Abdullah Arijo

The debate over creating new provinces in Pakistan is neither new nor straightforward. It echoes the country’s troubled history with the “One Unit” policy of the 1950s, which sought to consolidate provinces into a single entity but collapsed under accusations of injustice and centralization. Today, proposals to fragment provinces raise similar concerns: are they genuine attempts at reform, or political manoeuvres that risk repeating past mistakes?

Pakistan inherited its provincial framework from colonial administration. The four provinces, Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan, were delineated along ethnic and linguistic lines, though imperfectly. Over time, demands for new provinces have surfaced from regions that feel neglected by their provincial capitals. Calls for a Hazara province in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, a South Punjab province, and divisions within Sindh stem from grievances over unequal development, lack of representation, and cultural identity.

The “One Unit” experiment sought to erase provincial distinctions in favour of centralized governance. Its failure underscored the importance of recognizing diversity and provincial rights. Today’s push for fragmentation must be scrutinized to ensure it is not driven by political expediency. Both episodes reflect a recurring tendency in governance, the preference for central control over genuine federalism.

Arguments

Supporters of new provinces advance several claims:

• Improved Governance: Smaller administrative units could enable more responsive governance and reduce bureaucratic inefficiency.
• Equitable Resource Distribution: Provincial capitals are often accused of monopolizing resources; new provinces could ensure fairer allocation.
• Cultural Recognition: Ethnic and linguistic groups may feel empowered if their identity is formally acknowledged through provincial status.
• Political Representation: Additional provinces would increase representation in the Senate and National Assembly, giving marginalized communities a stronger voice.

These arguments resonate most strongly in regions excluded from mainstream provincial politics, where citizens feel alienated from decision-making processes.

Counterarguments

Critics caution that the creation of new provinces may aggravate Pakistan’s challenges:

• Economic Strain: Establishing new provinces requires vast investment in capital, bureaucracies, and infrastructure, which the fragile economy may not sustain.
• Administrative Complexity: More provinces mean additional layers of governance, potentially slowing decision-making rather than improving it.
• Ethnic Fragmentation: Dividing provinces along ethnic lines risks deepening divisions and fuelling separatist tendencies.
• Political Manipulation: Demands for provinces are often exploited by political parties for electoral gains rather than genuine reform.
• Resource Conflicts: Provinces already dispute water, energy, and revenue distribution; additional provinces could multiply these conflicts.

Case Studies

• South Punjab: Advocates argue that Lahore-centric governance ignores southern Punjab. Critics counter that redrawing boundaries and building new institutions would be fraught with conflict.
• Hazara Province: The Hazara community feels marginalized within Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. While a new province might address grievances, it could also trigger similar demands elsewhere, leading to endless fragmentation.
• Sindh Division: Calls to divide Sindh into urban and rural provinces highlight tensions between Karachi and interior Sindh. Such a move could inflame ethnic hostilities and destabilize the province.

These examples illustrate both the appeal and the risks of provincial restructuring. Each case reflects genuine grievances but also exposes the dangers of setting precedents that could encourage further fragmentation.

Socioeconomic Implications

Pakistan already grapples with poverty, unemployment, and inadequate infrastructure. Creating new provinces would divert scarce resources toward administrative restructuring rather than development. Investment in education, healthcare, and industry may yield better outcomes than building new bureaucracies.

Moreover, the risk of corruption and patronage politics could rise with more provincial governments competing for federal funds. Excessive fragmentation could weaken national cohesion, echoing lessons from East Pakistan’s secession in 1971. While the contexts differ, the reminder is clear: unity must be prioritized over division.

Pakistan’s strength lies in its diversity, but diversity must be managed within a framework of cohesion. Provinces created primarily on ethnic or linguistic grounds may embolden separatist movements. The challenge is to balance recognition of identity with the imperative of national unity.

The secession of East Pakistan remains a sobering reminder of the dangers of alienation. While today’s demands differ in scale and context, they highlight the importance of inclusive governance. Fragmentation without reform risks repeating historical mistakes.

Provinces Are Problematic

Provinces are not merely administrative units; they embody centuries of cultural, linguistic, and historical identity. Dividing them risks weakening this collective heritage and diluting the sense of belonging among communities.

• Administrative Burden: Creating new provinces means duplicating bureaucracies’ new assemblies, governors, ministries, and departments. This adds unnecessary financial strain on the national budget instead of improving governance within existing structures.
• Political Exploitation: Calls for new provinces are often politically motivated rather than genuinely aimed at public welfare. Division can be used as a tool to gain votes or consolidate power, rather than addressing real issues like poverty, education, or healthcare.
• Resource Distribution: Instead of solving inequities, new provinces may intensify disputes over water, land, and natural resources. Existing provinces already struggle with fair distribution; multiplying provinces risks multiplying conflicts.
• National Unity: More provinces can foster regionalism and deepen divisions, undermining the spirit of national cohesion. Strengthening existing provinces is a better path to unity than fragmenting them further.

Alternatives

Rather than carving out new provinces, reforms should focus on:

• Decentralization of Power: Empowering local governments can address grievances without destabilizing the provincial map.
• Better Resource Management: Transparent mechanisms for distributing funds can reduce perceptions of bias.
• Inclusive Politics: Ensuring fair representation of marginalized groups within provincial assemblies can mitigate alienation.
• Development Focus: Prioritizing infrastructure, education, and healthcare in neglected regions can reduce demands for new provinces.

These measures address grievances without destabilizing the federation and avoiding the economic and political risks of fragmentation.

The creation of new provinces may appear to offer solutions to governance and representation challenges. In reality, however, it risks multiplying problems. Economic strain, administrative complexity, ethnic fragmentation, and political manipulation could outweigh potential benefits.

Pakistan’s path to stability lies not in division, but in strengthening local governance, ensuring equitable resource distribution, and fostering inclusive politics. Only through such measures can the country move towards unity and progress.

The debate over new provinces is ultimately a debate about justice, identity, and governance. Whether Pakistan chooses fragmentation or reform, the decision must be guided by long-term stability rather than short-term political gains.

Read: Fear, Crime, Silence: Sindh’s Hidden Order

________________

Abdullah Arijo is a professor and curriculum architect at Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam, specializing in Parasitology, fisheries, aquaculture, zoology, and environmental sciences. He is also a civic advocate for climate resilience and sustainable development.