The debate over the creation of new provinces or administrative units in Pakistan has gained renewed momentum, and with it has come an increasingly intense discussion over what administrative and constitutional status should be accorded to Karachi, the country’s largest city.
The debate has acquired fresh relevance as the Muttahida Qaumi Movement-Pakistan (MQM-P) has renewed its campaign for new provinces, including a separate administrative unit in urban Sindh, while the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) continues to oppose any division of Sindh. Recent statements by MQM-P leaders have framed the demand primarily in administrative terms, arguing that the existing structure has failed to meet the governance and development needs of a rapidly growing population. One stream of argument regarding Karachi is that it should be made a federally administered unit or territory because successive provincial governments, in which the PPP has had a dominant role, have been unable to govern the mega city effectively. Proponents of this view argue that the problems of Karachi are so complex, convoluted and multipronged that only the federal government, administering it directly and without provincial political interests, could address them effectively. A second stream of argument, led by the MQM-P, is that Karachi or the major urban centres of Sindh should be made a separate province or administrative unit because only such a structural change could address the city’s longstanding problems. The PPP, on the other hand, has consistently opposed dividing Sindh. In February 2026, the Sindh Assembly passed a resolution declaring Karachi an integral and inseparable part of Sindh and rejecting any move to create a separate Karachi province.
Around a couple of years ago, the MQM had formally demanded the creation of a new urban-based province in Sindh, touching off a highly sensitive issue in the politics of the country. The MQM, which has historically been a dominant political force in urban Sindh, had long been desirous of making such a demand but had often shied away from formally pursuing it. The demand was also raised on the floor of the Sindh Assembly by an MQM lawmaker, who argued for a separate province for Urdu-speaking residents of Sindh.
The MQM-P has for some time been voicing the demand for new provinces comprising the major urban centres of Sindh, including Karachi, Hyderabad, Sukkur and Nawabshah, among other areas. More recently, however, the party has sought to present the demand primarily on administrative rather than ethnic or linguistic grounds. MQM-P leaders have argued that new provinces are necessary to improve governance, public service delivery, resource distribution and administrative efficiency.
Although the formation of new provinces may not necessarily be a bad idea if the objective is to improve governance and social-service delivery, the political context surrounding the MQM-P demand cannot be ignored. Critics have questioned whether the demand for a Karachi or urban Sindh province is also linked to the party’s desire to regain political control over an area where it once exercised much greater influence. The MQM-P, however, now argues that the demand is based on administrative necessity rather than ethnic considerations and has publicly sought support for new provinces across Pakistan.
It is important to recognise, however, that Karachi is not an ethnically homogeneous city. Alongside Urdu-speaking residents, it has large Pashtun, Punjabi, Sindhi, Baloch and other communities. A political or administrative arrangement based explicitly on ethnicity could therefore create new tensions rather than resolve existing ones. Any restructuring of Karachi or urban Sindh would need to protect the political, economic and civic rights of all communities living in the city rather than creating a system perceived as belonging to one ethnic group.
The MQM-P’s demand has also created political pressure on the PPP, which has rejected the idea of new provinces in Sindh. At the same time, the party has sought to remind the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) of past demands by its leadership for the creation of new administrative arrangements. The political history of the issue is important because demands for new provinces have previously been used by major parties as leverage against one another. The MQM-P’s current campaign is therefore unfolding not only as an administrative debate but also within the broader political competition among the PPP, PML-N and MQM-P. Recent exchanges between the PPP and MQM-P show that the issue has already become politically contentious.
The need for administrative restructuring has been raised for years, particularly because the existing provinces are geographically and demographically large. Effective devolution could potentially improve administration, social-service delivery and the distribution of resources among different regions and communities. At the same time, the creation of provinces cannot by itself guarantee better governance. Without strong institutions, accountable local governments, transparent resource distribution and effective public administration, simply redrawing provincial boundaries may not solve the underlying problems.
Another important argument advanced in favour of additional provinces has been the concentration of political and administrative power in the larger federating units. Punjab’s population gives it considerable weight in the National Assembly, while demands for additional provinces within Punjab have frequently been linked to concerns about political representation and equitable distribution of resources. Supporters of new provinces have also pointed to historical regions such as Bahawalpur and the Seraiki belt in Punjab.
However, the debate also demonstrates that the demand for administrative restructuring cannot be reduced to one province or one ethnic community. Groups within the existing provinces have themselves sought separate administrative units. The Hindko-speaking population of the Hazara region in KP and Pashtun communities in Balochistan are examples of communities that have, at different times, raised demands for greater administrative autonomy or separate provincial arrangements.
As far as Karachi is concerned, the issues and problems of the city are so profound and extensive that neither simply making it a new province nor maintaining the existing status quo necessarily provides an adequate answer. The city needs a governance structure capable of dealing with its enormous population, infrastructure requirements, water shortages, transport problems, sanitation needs, housing pressures, policing requirements and economic importance.
One possible option is to make Karachi a federally administered unit and have the federal government administer it through a council of experts and technocrats, with substantial representation from Karachi itself. Such an arrangement would need to be carefully designed to preserve local representation, ensure accountability and prevent excessive centralisation. It would also require constitutional and political consensus because changing the territorial status of a province or creating a new province involves constitutional procedures and cannot be accomplished through an ordinary administrative decision.
The larger lesson is that Pakistan needs to approach the question of new provinces through the lens of governance rather than political expediency or ethnic competition. Karachi’s enormous economic contribution and its persistent civic problems warrant serious consideration of alternative administrative arrangements. But whatever model is eventually considered — a separate province, a federally administered territory, a powerful metropolitan government or substantially strengthened local government — its success would ultimately depend on whether it gives Karachi an accountable, representative and financially empowered system capable of delivering basic services to all of its residents.