The Case For New Provinces

Interview -- Former president Pervez Musharraf

By Amir Zia

Monthly Narratives

December 2017  

For most mainstream political parties, the creation of new provinces in Pakistan is not an option at all. Nonetheless, there are some powerful voices who have been increasingly advocating this cause.

Those seeking the creation of new provinces in Pakistan, believe that it would improve governance, devolve power to the grassroots level and help deal with the challenge of narrow provincialism and ethnic-based politics. That’s the reason they cite for the formation of new provinces along administrative lines rather than ethnic considerations.

However, implementing any such decision is easier said than done because of the sensitivities involved. For the old guard politicians, whose vested interests are solidly linked to the existing order, it is a firm ‘no’ as they maintain that Pakistan comprises the federating units, which decided to join Pakistan at the time of independence. They hold provincial boundaries as sacred.

But it is also true that the existing political order has failed to resolve basic contradictions of the country, including the settlement of issues pertaining to the distribution of resources, the devolution of power or providing a corruption-free and pro-people government.

In other countries, the creation of new administrative units is not considered taboo. New challenges and changing circumstances keep introducing innovative ideas and new solutions. Can this be done in Pakistan? Does Pakistan need new provinces? And the billion dollar question; how can new provinces be created?

Given Pakistan’s polarised politics, dominated by the Panama and ‘Aqama’ scandals, such issues are not high on the agenda of the majority of big players.

General (retd) Pervez Musharraf, the former president of Pakistan, talks to Narratives on why Pakistan needs new provinces. Narratives presents extracts from his interview.

***

-- A number of times, you have said that one of your regrets remains that you did not create new provinces. Why do you think new provinces are needed in Pakistan?

Any structure of governance should ensure maximum decentralisation. This is vital not just for Pakistan, but in any country focused on the welfare and well-being of its citizens.

In Pakistan, creating new provinces is necessary because it’s the demand of the people. There are two sets of problems. The first one is related to Punjab, which unfortunately is the actual bone of contention. Punjab is the largest province in terms of population, which results in its dominance in the country’s politics.

As a result, smaller provinces have developed a sense of deprivation and they often unnecessarily accuse Punjab of exploiting the country’s resources. Even the Pakistan Army is often labelled Punjab’s army, which is an incorrect perception.

The second issue is that many people tend to view the problems being faced by them from an ethnic point of view, though we should see it from Pakistan’s perspective. This simply means bringing an improvement in governance.

Another key dilemma for Pakistan is that because of four huge and powerful provinces, the centre, or federation, has become weak. I believe that the centre should be powerful, while provinces should be administratively strong for efficient governance. This is possible only if we have more provinces. Creating new provinces is not a big undertaking, but we should keep in mind the sensitivities. For this, a think tank must be set up to examine the issue minutely and thoroughly.

-- When you were in power, what prevented you from creating new provinces?

When I took charge, I had other pressing issues; fixing the economy, for example, was a big challenge at that time. Then came 9/11 (terrorist strikes in the US), which diverted our attention from other key issues.

If we had taken up the issue of creating new provinces at that time, which I understand is very sensitive, I wouldn’t have been able to turn the economy around. But countries that are unable to deal with such sensitive issues lag behind in the race of progress and development. I realise we should have tackled this issue as well, but since there was so much to do, I thought it appropriate to avoid it at that time.

-- There’s a lot of resistance to this idea from small nationalist groups as well as traditional political parties. How do you suggest executing such a plan?

I realise the sensitivity of the issue. It can be resolved if an interim government with a strong backing of the Supreme Court and the army is empowered to amend the Constitution. But it should be done ensuring that there are no ethnic divisions, which would lead to disputes. New provinces should be carved out on administrative lines.

-- Do you think provincial boundaries are sacred as some ethnic and sub-nationalist forces tend to perceive?

Indeed there are sensitivities and sentiment involved. Take Sindh, for example. Stakeholders there think that Karachi should not be given the status of a separate province, which is right. While Sindh’s grievances are justified, we have to think how the province can be divided into smaller units without triggering ethnic rivalries. The same goes for other provinces.

-- Dr Tahir-ul Qadri once suggested that new provinces be created on the basis of existing divisions. This he believes will help devolution of power to grassroots level. Is it a workable solution? 

Yes, this is one of the solutions. But just one person cannot solve the matter. We need to have input from all quarters before making any decision.

-- Will smaller provinces help curb provincialism and result in better governance, given the fact that these two issues have remained a bane in our politics?

You are absolutely right. If we have more provinces, the utilisation of funds will be much more effective and the people of that area will certainly benefit economically. This would lead to their overall prosperity and well-being. At the same time, the centre will also become strong.

-- After the 18th Amendment, education along with other key departments, has also been handed over to the provinces. As a result each province now has its own curriculum. Don’t you think the centre should keep a few departments, such as education, under its control which is vital for national cohesion?

When I formed the district governments under the local government system, we decided that the primary and secondary level education would be run by the district governments. A councillor at the district level would be in charge of everything – teachers’ postings, their recruitment, school attendance, while the province would be responsible for college education. The Higher Education Commission would look after university education. Our education system was in very good shape by virtue of these measures.

-- Currently one province – Punjab – decides who gains power at the centre. Will new provinces help change this pattern?

Absolutely. And that’s precisely the reason why smaller provinces crib against Punjab.  So if we are not heeding the grievances of other provinces, then we are behaving like ostriches. Unfortunately, our political leadership is blind and deaf to such bitter realities.

-- A debate is raging these days about FATA’s (Federally Administrated Tribal Areas) merger with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Your thoughts on this issue?

We should not have a piecemeal approach to this issue. We have to resolve the issue of new provinces once and for all. Going by its geography, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is a long province which runs from Pakistan’s frontier with China, Chitral and going down to Zhob in Balochistan. Those who say that FATA should become a province are not being practical. It starts from Bajaur Agency and goes through seven agencies, up to South Waziristan. However, the need of the hour is to make more provinces and deal with this issue in one go.

-- Have you identified the forces in favour of crafting new provinces?

Frankly, I haven’t identified such forces in detail, let alone establishing contacts with any party on this issue. But in hindsight, I believe I should’ve done that . . . it’s an important issue and must be discussed and debated at the national level.

-- One of the major achievements of your government was setting up of an empowered local government system, but this reform has been undone by the major political parties. Why do our traditional parties stand opposed to powerful local bodies?

Because of personal vested interests of MNAs and MPAs. Politicians get billions of rupees worth of funds in the name of development for their constituencies, and they have often used or pocketed at least a big chunk for themselves. We, in contrast, granted councillors administrative, political, and, most importantly, financial authority. When we decentralised the system, public sector development funds were given directly to the 110 districts. In developed countries like the United States and England, mayors are empowered and run the show, but sadly in Pakistan they have been made powerless.

Challenge from Within

By Amir Zia

Monthly Narratives

December 2017

Most Muslim countries which are victims of terrorism are being targeted by Sunni militant groups – ranging from Al-Qaeda and Daesh (the Islamic State) to the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and Boko Haram. The other fringe and shadowy militant groups – operating in the Middle East, South Asia and Central Asia – are also predominantly Sunni Muslims. So it is natural that the Sunni Muslim states feel the strongest need to band together against this common threat.

Terrorism is a global challenge, but it is the Muslim world which has suffered, and continues to suffer, the most at the hands of terrorists. Extremist mindsets and terrorist ideologies are not just spreading death and destruction in many Muslim lands, but tearing them apart, as violent non-state actors try to force regime changes or bring down some of these states altogether.

From suicide bombings to cold-blooded murder and other heinous acts of violence, terrorists use and abuse the sacred name of Islam to justify atrocities against fellow Muslims. At the core, it is essentially Muslim countries, which serve as the real battleground between moderates and those flaunting a flawed and distorted version of Islam.

Any terrorist attack in a Western capital triggers a global debate on terrorism, resulting in increasing hostility towards Muslims. But massive terror attacks in places like Egypt, Somalia or Pakistan rarely capture attention or condemnation beyond a cursory headline.

The United States and the rest of the Western world, supposedly the chief target of the Islamist terror groups have, by and large, managed to insulate themselves from religiously-motivated terrorism in recent years through effective control of frontiers, strict surveillance of the Muslim diaspora and taking the war to the Muslim lands. Yet, the West feels it is living under the constant shadow and threat of terrorism.

But the Muslim world finds itself trapped within a graver situation and caught in a double bind. Many Muslim countries directly bear the brunt of terrorism and extremism, yet some of them are being singled out and blamed for serving as the epicentres of violent non-state actors. Countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are the prime examples of this case.

While Pakistan and its institutions are fighting a protracted war with terrorist groups at a great human and economic cost, it remains the target of a non-stop direct and indirect smear campaign by the United States and its allies, which accuse it of not doing enough in this war. Similarly, Saudi Arabia is being blamed for promoting a radical and conservative brand of Islam, albeit in softer tones, as even its critics in the West do not want to offend this oil rich, wealthy state.

The biggest victim

However, the hard fact remains that Muslims are the biggest victims of terrorism. The enormity of this challenge can be gauged by the data shared by General (retired) Raheel Sharif at the inaugural defence ministers’ conference of the Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition (IMCTC) in Riyadh in November.

According to General Sharif – Commander-in-Chief of the IMCTC – more than 200,000 people were killed and many more wounded in around 70,000 terrorist attacks worldwide during the past six years. In these attacks, more than “70 percent (of the) deaths occurred in the Islamic World in which Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria and Pakistan were the most affected.”

Many Muslim countries – from the Middle East to Africa and South Asia to Central Asia – stand shaken by violent, faceless non-state actors, who recognise no boundaries and do not adhere to any rules of the game.

Therefore, it is understandable that the challenge posed by terrorists, cloaking themselves in the garb of Islam, should be countered from within the Islamic world ideologically, politically and militarily. Although several Muslim states have been dealing with this challenge, a coordinated regional and global response has hitherto remained missing.

Islamic Military Alliance

The IMCTC, also called the Islamic Military Alliance, offers a joint platform against the twin scourges of extremism and terrorism in the Muslim world.

The idea and initiative to develop a comprehensive strategic approach against terrorism – under the banner of IMCTC – formally came from Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, in December 2015. Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has now thrown his weight behind the initiative to empower this pan-Islamic united front against violent extremism in a bid to defeat it.

Initially, 34 Muslim countries were part of the IMCTC, but its membership has now increased to 41. Besides Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, important Muslim countries, including Turkey, Malaysia, Egypt, the UAE, Kuwait and Jordan, are part of the alliance. Other nations, which remain direct targets and victims of terrorism, such as Afghanistan, Nigeria and Bangladesh are also in its fold.

The IMCTC’s formation has been welcomed in most parts of the Islamic world, as well as in other important countries, including the United States, China and Germany. The alliance is being described as the best response to those forces, which are trying to associate Islam with terrorism.

However, there are elements which dub IMCTC as a sectarian front due to the absence of Shiite-majority Iran and Iraq from its ranks. But these allegations reflect more the Saudi-Iran tensions, as there are several countries within this alliance which enjoy friendly, cordial and close relations with Tehran including Lebanon, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Oman and Kuwait. Even Indonesia, which announced support for the IMCTC has good relations with Iran.

Not against any sect

IMCTC Commander-in-Chief General Raheel Sharif has repeatedly said that the sole purpose of the alliance is to fight terrorism. “It is not against any country, sect or religion,” he reiterated in his November 26 address at the IMCTC’s Riyadh conference.

Most Muslim countries which are victims of terrorism are being targeted by Sunni militant groups – ranging from Al-Qaeda and Daesh (the Islamic State) to the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan and Boko Haram. The other fringe and shadowy militant groups – operating in the Middle East, South Asia and Central Asia – are also predominantly Sunni Muslims. So it is natural that the Sunni Muslim states feel the strongest need to band together against this common threat.

The IMCTC aims to develop “a collective response against terrorism, capable of leading and coordinating the efforts of member countries with high efficiency and effectiveness,” said General Sharif while explaining the raison d’etre of the alliance.

The alliance plans to coordinate with other nations and global organisations to develop a united front against terrorism and extremism.

IMCTC’s four domains

Fighting terrorism, remains “extremely complex and resource intense,” maintains General Sharif.

In this unconventional war, terrorists have the advantage of selecting the target and timing of an attack. They are not bound by any code of conduct and often strike at soft targets – including places of worships, markets, educational institutions, public parks and even hospitals. Pakistanis have ample experience of witnessing this kind of violence in which men, women, young and old and even children have been killed in cold blood in the name of religion.

It is a very difficult and complex war, demanding a high-level of planning, preparedness and round-the-clock vigilance – which is easier said than done. The IMCTC has announced it will seek to develop synergy among its member states, in terms of institutionalised mechanisms, so they can pool their resources, experience and expertise to defeat the enemy within.

The first and foremost area of cooperation is developing a counter-terrorism ideology. This is the most important component of the four domains on which IMCTC has decided to focus. The alliance aims to win the hearts and minds of the people by promoting Islam’s universal message of “moderation, tolerance and compassion.” For this, a concerted effort is required on the intellectual front to counter the flawed, perverted and irrational message of the terrorists, who propagate that by one act of senseless ‘bravery’ and killing innocent people, they could revive their imagined glory of Islam.

The second important component of this strategy, supplementing the first point, is communications. The IMCTC has announced its plans to develop, produce and publish factual media content to correct perceptions about Islam and discredit radical and extremist narratives.

The third aspect of the IMCTC strategy is choking all types of financing to terrorists through collaboration and coordination of member countries and relevant stakeholders. For this, the IMCTC plans to develop and share financial intelligence capabilities, advance legal and regulatory frameworks and other support mechanisms.

The fourth pertains to developing a platform to help member countries in their counter-terrorism operations through intelligence sharing and capacity-building. This involves improving coordination between the forces of member states and conducting anti-terrorism training and joint exercises in rural and urban environments.

Conflict resolution

Terrorist and extremist narratives gain currency mainly by exploiting Muslim rage and anger due to the unresolved conflicts such as the occupation of Palestine and Kashmir and the invasion of their lands by foreign powers. Without resolving these disputes, a complete victory against extremism and terrorism would continue to evade us.

While there is acknowledgment of this fact among the member states of the alliance, this most important point was ignored in the Riyadh conference. The real challenge for the entire Muslim leadership is how to make any progress on this front. Going forward, the IMCTC leadership must give centre stage to disputes and conflicts, involving Muslims and their occupied territories, to defeat terrorist and extremist narratives. For this, greater cohesion, political will and ideological unity would be needed among the member states to make the alliance more meaningful.

At the same time, there is another major challenge for the Muslim leadership; to ensure that the West, and the world at large, recognise and differentiate between terrorism and the legitimate freedom struggle of the people in occupied lands.

This again requires political will, commitment and vision from the Muslim leaders to present and fight their case. Are the rulers of Muslim countries ready to play this greater role that circumstances demand of them?

The creation of the IMCTC and the announcement of its four-pronged strategy should be considered the initial few steps in the right direction, but the goal of defeating extremism and terrorism cannot materialise if Muslims in different parts of the world continue to suffer at the hands of occupation forces.

Allied Against Terrorism

By Amir Zia

Monthly Hilal

December 2017

Pakistan’s decision to join the 41-nation Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition (IMCTC) enjoys a broad national consensus, but a handful of skeptics want Islamabad to stay away from the Saudi-led alliance as they fear that it would bring more harm to the country than good.

The anti-IMCTC arguments stem from three core apprehensions.
Firstly, the 41-member alliance is seen by some as an anti-Iran bloc, carrying sectarian overtones. They believe that it would strain Pakistan’s relations with Tehran and is likely to antagonize at least a section of the country’s Shi’ite Muslims, who comprise roughly 15-20 percent of the population.

Secondly, there are fears that Pakistan – being the alliance member – might inadvertently be sucked into some Middle Eastern conflict, resulting into disastrous domestic and regional implications.

Thirdly, some see this entire exercise as a non-starter because of rivalries among the IMCTC member states and their different requirements, challenges and priorities in the war against terrorism.

Indeed, given simmering tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, Pakistan’s civil and military leaders will have to perform a delicate high-wire act to ensure that on one hand Islamabad’s time-tested strategic and economic relations with old, dependable brotherly Muslim country Saudi Arabia continues to grow and expand, and on the other they address concerns of the immediate neighbour Iran regarding this newly formed coalition.

Although staying away from the IMCTC as advocated by some fringe element and handful of politicians is no option at all, Pakistan has opted for the right strategy of playing an active role in the coalition as a major military power of the Muslim world and simultaneously soothing anxieties of Tehran.

The process of reaching out to Iran has already started. Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa in early November made a three-day visit to Tehran – the first ever by Chief of the Army Staff in more than two decades – where he announced Islamabad’s determination to expand ties with Iran in all spheres. According to Iranian media reports, General Bajwa in his meetings with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and other top leaders called for expanding military and defence ties and collaboration between the two countries for regional peace and security.

General Bajwa’s Iran visit came ahead of the IMCTC’s first meeting of Ministers of Defence in Riyadh under the slogan ‘allied against terrorism’ held on November 26. The impressive moot, inaugurated by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, pledged to boost its military capabilities to dismantle terrorist organizations.

General (retired) Raheel Sharif, commander-in-chief of the IMCTC, in his address at the conference again categorically stated that the objective of the coalition is “to fight against terrorism and it is not against any country, sect or religion.” Sharif gave a similar message in his October 16 address in Bahrain where he shared Pakistan’s experience of turning the tide of terrorism.

The repeated assertions by the top IMCTC military commander as well as Pakistan’s civil and military leaders’ commitment about taking on terrorists should put at rest all speculations about coalition being an anti-Iran bloc. The presence of Pakistan and countries like Turkey in the IMCTC would ensure that the alliance sticks to its declaration unveiled in Riyadh conference in which terrorism has been identified as a “constant and growing challenge to peace” and the member states have vowed to counter it “through education and knowledge.”

The four-point master-plan focuses on countering terrorist ideology, developing factual media content to counter terrorist narrative, halting terror financing and building anti-terrorism capabilities of military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies of the member countries. The declaration and statements by the IMCTC commander-in-chief focuses on the faceless violent non-state actors who challenge and threaten member states in one way or the other.

A day after the Riyadh conference, Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi and Army Chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa arrived in Saudi Arabia with a message that Pakistan fully “endorses and supports” policies of its ally in the region. The Prime Minister Office said that Abbasi “lauded efforts of the Saudi leadership in bringing peace and stability to the region and assured the King (Salman bin Abdulaziz) of Pakistan’s full support….”

This active diplomacy by Pakistan’s military and civil leaders with Saudi Arabia and Iran underlines Islamabad’s commitment of fighting terrorism along with the other Muslim states as well as its resolve of maintaining friendly ties with neighbouring countries.

Pakistan has also more than once demonstrated determination of not getting involved in any Middle Eastern conflict, but in line with the desire of overwhelming number of Pakistanis, Islamabad has also expressed commitment of defending the holy lands in Saudi Arabia.

The third apprehension that traditional rivalries and contradictions among some IMCTC member states would prevent it from taking off does not take into account the fact that these countries have more reasons to cooperate with one another to combat terrorism than basis for non-cooperation. The dangerous phenomenon of terrorism remains the biggest challenge to peace and stability in the 21st century world, especially for Muslim countries where terrorists misuse the sacred name of Islam in an attempt to legitimize their activities.

General Raheel while highlighting the gravity of the threat posed by terrorists said at the conference that “in the last six years, approximately 70,000 terrorist attacks occurred worldwide, resulting in more than 200,000 deaths.” He added that, “over 70 percent of terrorism related deaths occurred in the Islamic World, most affected were Iraq, Afghanistan, Nigeria and Pakistan.”

Pakistan remains the only country in the world, which turned the tide of terrorism single-handedly despite active support to terrorist networks by hostile neighbours like India and an anti-Pakistan lobby within the Afghan government. Yet, Pakistan has managed to put the terrorists on the back foot.

The IMCTC member states can certainly learn from one another’s anti-terrorism experience and supplement efforts in this non-conventional war which is being described as “extremely complex and resource intense.”

The initiative taken by His Majesty, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud is historic and path-breaking in a sense that it managed to bring most of the Muslim countries on one platform to counter the common threat of terrorism.

The coalition aims “to utilize the expertise and resources of member and friendly countries” and provide them support to build capabilities of military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Joint exercises and anti-terrorism training remain important pillars of the strategy in which the battle-hardened Pakistan Armed Forces – especially the army and the air force – will take the lead in providing training to the forces of IMCTC allies.

The IMCTC also plans to establish “a state-of-the-art intelligence and information sharing platform to counter terrorist networks, their facilitators, abettors, sympathizers and financiers.”

As the IMCTC is a unique and first of its kind initiative in the highly polarized and divided Muslim world, skepticism and doubts about its role and future are understandable.

But should obstacles or fears of failure stop the Muslim leadership from trying bold and imaginative new initiatives? The grand idea behind the IMCTC is to unite Muslims against the scourge of terrorism, expose the misinterpretation and abuse of Islam by terrorists and build a counter narrative while taking decisive steps to weed out terrorists.

The Muslim world has suffered the most at the hands of terrorists and it has no option but to win the war against terrorism and the extremist ideologies. The good thing is that many leaders of the Muslim world realize that wars cannot be won in the battlefields alone, and they also need to be won in the hearts and minds of the people. The IMCTC envisions to fight this war on both the fronts – which is a good beginning.