Sharif brothers
THAT Pakistan must be divided into smaller and more manageable administrative-cum-political divisions is an argument that one has heard for many years. After all, if India can have new states based on linguistic divisions, why can’t Pakistan have more provinces? It makes a lot of sense if newer and more manageable administrative divisions are carved out of the existing four provinces with the objective of catering to the political sentiments of the people. Smaller units will mean the decentralisation of power, which should appease those who are worried about the concentration of power. The application of the above formula should make at least two groups happy: Punjab’s Seraiki and urban Sindh’s Urdu-speaking Mohajir communities. They have been struggling for years for recognition of their political and social rights. Unfortunately for the Mohajir community, it is demographically not in a position to make such a demand. Its political representatives might try to join forces with Sindhi nationalists to stop the inflow of the Pathans or Punjabis. But this will only work as long as they share political objectives, especially when one considers their history of animosity. More importantly, there is less discussion of a division of Sindh or other provinces and more about the division of Punjab — especially in the context of a province for Seraiki speakers — not to mention divisions within the Seraiki-speaking area and the issue of making Bahawalpur a province. None of the above means that Punjab today is more prepared for a division than other provinces. However, this indicates the weakening of the elite consensus in Punjab which may eventually move towards the breakdown of the agreement of the ruling elite in the largest province. Although smaller administrative divisions are absolutely logical, one must not be labouring under the misapprehension that the debate we are hearing has anything to do with the betterment of ordinary people. The Seraiki-speaking elite dwelling mainly in southern Punjab is weary of the concentration of power in Lahore, especially in the hands of the PML-N and the Sharif brothers. A new Seraiki province with its capital in one of the larger cities of southern Punjab will dramatically change Punjab’s political scene. But the role played by central forces is critical. Sources suggest that the PPP government would support this formula so that the power of the Sharif brothers can be diluted. Electoral results show that PPP support is concentrated in rural Punjab which is basically south Punjab versus PML-N’s following in the urban centres. A new political division will dilute the Punjabi urban versus rural division. Another province will also mean that Punjab would not be directly and totally controlled by the Sharifs and their party. Shahbaz Sharif can only be chief minister in one province, not two. Not to mention the fact that the success of the Seraiki movement will result in the possible creation of the Potohar province or some other division. The Bahawalpur province debate is inextricably linked to the demand for a Seraiki province. One explanation for a smaller province is that it is bound to kill the movement for a larger province. From a particular perspective, the demand for a Seraiki province versus a Bahawalpur province is the battle between two political poles, one more centrist and pro-establishment than the other. The entire debate is interesting because it indicates the weakening of elite consensus in Punjab, a province which is considered critical to Pakistan and its power politics. It must also be mentioned that the subcontinent has taken a newer shape every time elite consensus broke down. Starting from the independence of India and Pakistan to the breakup of Pakistan in 1971, this will probably be the third time in our history that the breakdown of consensus might give a new shape to the political division of territory. Of course, this time it will be done in a more decent manner, which is to be expected since there is no grass-roots demand for a new province. There are many who believe that this is about the betterment of the people. Surely, people in Multan, D.G. Khan, Bahawalpur and other places are bothered by the long trek to Lahore whenever they need to get things done. It is also a fact that there is greater development work in north and central Punjab than in the south. There are three issues worth considering in this regard. First, the south versus north and centre is also a story of uneven urban development. Second, the lack of development is not just about the concentration of power in Lahore but the peculiar concentration of capital and industrial development in the province. North and central Punjab are better developed because most industries, including defence, are located there. While this is because the bulk of the military is from the north and centre, the majority of dynamic entrepreneurs are also located here rather than in the south. Third, the comparative lack of industrialisation is also because the large landowners and politicians of southern Punjab have stuck to the more traditional industries and methods of capital formation. This varied pattern is not surprising since the relatively poorer agriculture of north Punjab led to other forms of money-making. In any case, the Seraiki-speaking elite attached itself to the larger Punjabi elite including the military to get their share of resources. I remember Makhdoom Khursheed Zaman Qureshi of Bahawalpur, interim minister for agriculture in Punjab during Musharraf’s tenure, talk about the benefits of giving free land to the generals in south Punjab. There are others like the Legharis with links to the ISI through the Mehran Bank scandal. The stories are endless. The fact of the matter is that the Makhdooms, Legharis, Abbasis, Gilanis etc from south Punjab see the division of the larger province as an opportunity to build their own stronghold. In a nutshell we might see a new shape of Punjab but such a change must be planned properly to divert benefits to the people rather than to the predatory elite.
No comments:
Post a Comment