Pakistan is approaching 79 years since its creation. During these decades, the country has witnessed wars, political crises, periods of dictatorship, democratic governments, economic sanctions, terrorism, floods, earthquakes, inflation and many other challenges.
Yet one fundamental question remains: has the state been able to provide the ordinary citizen with dignity, justice, employment, education, healthcare and basic necessities?
Today, Pakistan is once again debating the creation of new provinces. Proposals for South Punjab, a separate Saraiki province and Hazara are frequently raised, while discussions about dividing Sindh and creating other administrative units have also emerged. Political parties approach these demands according to their political interests, regional priorities and electoral calculations.
But the central question is simple: Will new provinces actually improve the lives of ordinary citizens, or will they merely create new political battlegrounds?
A province is not simply a line drawn on a map. It is a constitutional, political, administrative and financial unit requiring a capital, assembly, secretariat, high court, police, bureaucracy, government departments, infrastructure and substantial financial resources.
If a new province is created while the existing system remains slow, corrupt, inefficient and insensitive to citizens, the map may change but people’s lives will not.
Pakistan’s fundamental problem is therefore not simply that its provinces are too large. The real issue is how quickly, fairly and transparently power and resources reach ordinary citizens.
For decades, governance has remained heavily concentrated in major provincial centres such as Lahore, Karachi, Peshawar and Quetta. Citizens in remote districts often have to travel long distances even for relatively minor government matters. Obtaining certificates, resolving land disputes, accessing records, receiving treatment in government hospitals, finding teachers in schools or dealing with police and other departments can become exhausting experiences.
This raises an important question: if new administrative units can genuinely reduce these distances and bring government closer to citizens, is the idea unreasonable?
Certainly not.
Many countries have improved governance by dividing large administrative regions into smaller units. The issue is not division itself but the purpose behind it and the system through which it is implemented.
If new provinces are created to bring authority closer to people, develop neglected regions, ensure fair resource distribution and improve administration, the idea deserves serious national consideration. But if provincial demands are used mainly to strengthen vote banks, exploit regional emotions or create election slogans, they could deepen divisions rather than solve problems.
Pakistan has often focused more on creating new structures and political slogans than on strengthening existing institutions.
The public therefore deserves to know what tangible benefits a new province would provide. If a new administrative structure improves governance, promotes prosperity and operates through competent, honest and patriotic leadership, it can certainly be justified.
However, if creating a province only means new assemblies, secretariats, official vehicles, bureaucratic positions and additional expenditure while citizens continue facing the same problems, the country must ask whether it has created a province-or simply another administrative burden.
This is why the debate over new provinces must be connected with the urgent need for strong local governments.
Modern governance does not require every decision to be taken in a national or provincial capital. Technology now makes it possible to deliver many government services digitally and directly to citizens. What matters is whether administrative power actually reaches the people.
Unfortunately, local governments in Pakistan have remained weak and inconsistent for decades. Basic services such as sanitation, water supply, street cleaning, parks, local transportation and other civic facilities frequently become victims of political disputes.
A strong, empowered, financially accountable and genuinely autonomous local government system could significantly reduce the administrative burden on provincial governments. It could also address many problems that are currently being used as arguments for creating additional provinces.
However, decentralisation must be accompanied by transparency and accountability. Simply transferring authority without effective oversight could shift corruption from one level of government to another.
Another major issue is fiscal feasibility.
Creating a province may be politically attractive, but operating one requires enormous and sustained financial resources. Pakistan’s citizens already face economic pressures and difficult questions about public spending. Where would the resources for new administrative units come from? And if additional resources can be found, why have existing governments been unable to provide adequate services with the resources already available?
Any proposal for a new province should therefore be supported by a clear economic and administrative plan. Decisions should be based on facts, population, geography, infrastructure, revenue potential, administrative requirements and long-term financial sustainability-not merely political emotion.
Instead of allowing the debate to remain confined to political rallies and television talk shows, Pakistan should establish broad-based expert committees involving economists, constitutional experts, administrators, geographers and representatives of local communities. The public should be given clear information about the benefits, costs and implications of every proposal.
Regional identity must also be treated with respect. Language, culture and history are important components of society, but they should never become instruments of hatred or hostility among Pakistanis.
Pakistan needs administrative units that strengthen the federation rather than deepen ethnic or linguistic divisions.
The country’s experience also demonstrates that poverty cannot be eliminated simply by drawing new administrative boundaries. Prosperity comes through strong institutions, quality education, a productive economy, rule of law, transparent governance and merit.
Pakistan may need new provinces, but before creating new boundaries, it needs better systems and stronger principles of governance.
Any new administrative unit should therefore be created only on the basis of genuine public need. Its economic and administrative feasibility should be openly presented to citizens. Resource distribution must be transparent, institutional performance measurable and public accountability guaranteed. Most importantly, people must be consulted.
For 79 years, Pakistanis have heard countless promises-of development, prosperity, change, economic transformation and a better future. Yet the ordinary citizen continues to struggle with basic necessities and inadequate public services.
What Pakistan needs now is a workable system in which every citizen, regardless of language, region or province, feels like an equal stakeholder in the state.
The debate over new provinces should therefore move beyond political slogans and become a serious national dialogue. Regional identities should be recognised without creating hatred. Political interests should be accommodated without compromising the national interest. Development should be pursued alongside accountability.
Because provinces are created on maps, but prosperous societies are built through strong institutions.
After 79 years, the people of Pakistan need more than promises and slogans. They need an empowered, transparent, trustworthy and effective system of governance.
If new provinces can provide that, they may deserve public support.
But if only the map changes while people’s lives remain the same, Pakistan does not need new maps. It needs a system that changes people’s lives.
