Development as Transformational Politics: A Case of the Northern Areas

Mehpara HunzaiThis paper is a summary of a Master’s Thesis submitted to the University of London.

The author is a Hunzukutz, currently working in Bangladesh. INTRODUCTION

About 1.2 million people live in the high mountains of the Karakoram-Western Himalayan region, currently under control of Pakistan, but also claimed by India as part of the wider disputed area of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). The people of the area have been denied their fundamental rights for the last sixty years, despite having waged a war against the ruler of Kashmir and opting for Pakistan in 1947. The Constitutional status of the area is unsettled, despite the Supreme Court ordering the federal government to grant constitutional rights to the area in six months.

On the development side, the area receives more public sector funds on a per capita basis, and strong complementary development support from Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs), mainly from a group of institutions set up by His Highness the Aga Khan. This has produced an interesting dynamic, characterized by blunted political activism but improved social and economic wellbeing relative to other comparable remote regions of Pakistan, such as Baluchistan and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

In this paper, we consider the utility and relevance of development through civil society activism, as an effective additional tool for gaining incremental political empowerment in the Northern Areas. This approach is similar to other non-violent methods of political struggle, such as the political philosophy of non-violence, espoused by Ghandi in the Indian Sub-continent, but it offers many additional features. Ghandi combined non-violence with non-cooperation, but the outcome was not so non-violent.1 His approach may have saved many more lives and shortened the length of the freedom struggle, but it may also have delayed social and economic transformation of Indian masses by several decades, because of a missing development period. Northern Areas’ experience has been distinct as non-violence and cooperation with government on development issues.

This approach may be called development as transformational politics, or political transformation through other means, and it offers key promises that may be relevant to other conflict-prone regions around the world, especially after 9/11 where genuine political struggles can be branded as terrorist activities and suppressed without any question. Firstly, it offers a non-ideological view of political discourse with a clear focus on development, thus posing no threat to, and attracting no particular counter-reaction from the dominant authority maintaining the status quo. Secondly, it co-opts the state in creating a new social contract with its citizens and their civil institutions, in which the non-state actors share the burden of development and in creating a new division of labour and responsibility between the state and its citizens. Thirdly, this incremental approach may provide an answer to the failure of democracy in many countries around the world, including Pakistan, by having the promise to nurture inclusive and democratic processes of development and governance at the community level.

The paper begin with a theoretically framework that grounds the arguments, assessing the role of civil society actors with a strong commitment to participatory development and democracy, using the case of politically and economically marginalized Northern Areas.

Theoretical Framework

Development has many dimensions; from economic growth, social change, cultural renewal, political maturity to a general advancement in quality of life. Development is also equated with modernization and transition from tribal and agricultural modes of social organization to urban and industrial modes of living. All of these definitions are linked to values of freedom, free political discourse and democratic norms of decision making. Stemming from the Age of Enlightenment, the modernisation theory argues that technological and economic advances would enable people’s moral and cultural values to change. In other words these advances would eventually ‘modernise’ societies. The concepts of functionalism first drawn up by the French philosopher Emile Durkheim highlighted the interdependence of institutions and their interaction, with the maintenance of cultural and social utility2. In Emile’s book “The Division of Labour in Society”; social evolution was compared to biological evolution arguing that like organisms, societies pass through stages of progress3. By adapting to their surrounding environments and interacting with other societies, a society in theory will graduate from a mode of simplicity to one of advancement.

With respect to democratization in developing countries, a new discussion has evolved around the political culture concept, which has been perceived to be a crucial link between economic development and democracy (Leys, Colin, 1982). This analysis includes a ‘measure’ of political traditions as a signifier of not only the democratic quality of the objective dimensions of political life, i.e., polity, politics and policy, but indirectly also for the subjective dimensions of politics, i.e., political culture and traditions. For instance, government for the people by the people requires popular values, such as moderation, tolerance, civility, efficacy, knowledge and participation.

Amartya Sen in “Development as Freedom,” brings into the progression of politics and economics the perspective of indivisibility of freedoms. Sen rejects the typical gulf between the civil and political freedoms and economic rights, and argues that in its holistic meaning, development without other freedoms cannot be thought as fulfilment of basic needs alone4. For Sen, it is a continuum. Development is necessary for overcoming violations of elementary freedoms, as a “process of expanding substantive freedoms that people have.”5 Thus the stages of economic development bring about variations in freedoms and capabilities.

The connection between political freedoms and economic development has been recognized in theory but largely neglected in practice within the United Nations system and individual countries (P. Alston, 1994). The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed both political and economic rights (UN Doc A/810, 1948), but the subsequent drafting of two separate protocols divided rights into civil and political rights (CP Rights) and economic, social and cultural rights (ESC Rights). Most industrialized countries in the world have accepted ESC rights, except the United States.

Current Development-democracy DebateThere is broad consensus on the strong link between development and democracy. However, this consensus begins to degenerate into a “chicken or egg” debate in countries where democratic systems have failed for one reason or another.

‘Democracy first’ advocates argue that unless a country or a region does not have a functioning political system in place, one that is democratic and has rule of law and extends the basic liberties to its citizens, true development cannot take place. David Kilgour states that "stability and security are prerequisites for economic growth and development."6 He further adds that any discussion of initiative of development must start from promoting peace, democratic development and good governance. Without these three ‘ingredients, no amount of foreign aid, no matter how carefully spent, can ever achieve “development”, no matter how

2

we define it, development can only be built on a foundation of political stability’. A democratic system will trigger a virtuous cycle of development, as political freedoms are granted, citizens are empowered to press for policies that work to expand economic and social opportunities, the participatory component ensures all have a say in the decision making. This transition has taken place, presumably, in countries like Indonesia, Mexico and Poland, where democratisation has created free press and civil society participation that affects national policy.7 The basic argument is that with political freedoms come initiatives for development, for people to take their lives into their own hands. It is crucial here to question how grounded the ideal of democracy is, especially as development is so closely tied to its emergence.

Others argue that the interplay between the political and economic spheres is more true, which creates an interdependence. For instance, Kofi Anan says, “peace and development are inextricably linked–one feeding the other, enabling the other, and securing the other." 8

On the other side of this debate, it is increasingly being felt that representative democracy is not a panacea for all ills, especially in societies with a feudal and tribal make up and low development attainment. The notion that democracy can simply be supper imposed rather than being nurtured has been questioned by a growing number of sceptics who argue that social movements steeped in people’s basic concerns create a true appetite for democratic systems. This goes to show the gradual process that is required for a country to familiarise itself with a democratic system. Therefore, the general argument is that democracy is indispensable, but its success is grounded in public awareness, its political roots and the degree of ‘emancipation’ of its people, which appears to be a function of development.

The liberties of a democracy, such as political freedom, citizens’ rights, participation, and holding the government accountable are, of course, desired ends. However, in the absence of these rights, should people simply wait, take on the state in a confrontational way, or build their capacity to fight for their rights in an incremental way, is the question that has become the dominant view in many developing countries.

In the Northern Areas, the case for development can be made more forcefully, because it offers an alternative to the democratic deficit at the national level. The case may have wider appeal to situations where political interests of the dominant groups, such as the states of Israel, India and Pakistan, are simply unprepared or unwilling to grant political rights to territories under their control, because of their perceived national interests. Denial of political rights to weaker and subjugated groups may be an offence, but denial of development opportunity may be an even bigger crime because it perpetuates the unequal relationship and it holds subjugated people from realizing their ESC rights.

Civil Society and the Process of Democratization

Civil society is a broad term and it means any associational action on the part of citizens. The notion of civil society was born out of the excesses of the absolutist state in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Within the theory of European liberal political philosophy, there began an emphasis for a ‘private’ and ‘public’ sphere. As Western Europe began to industrialise, male property holders asserted the right of individual to operate freely in the market space without intrusion by the state.9 Thus civil society was a space created for development of the society that lay outside the state.

Civil society empowerment provides a check on the excesses of the state and the business sector, and assumes a role where the state is not the sole agent of development. The common belief lies within the idea that between the private sector, which is the engine for growth, and the state sector, which holds a monopoly over laws and policy, a mediating and balancing force is needed that ensures equity in access to opportunity, thus politics and polity are incomplete without civil society action.10

The main question that this research is primarily concerned with is the role of the civil society as an expression of popular will, a method for expressing voice, and a precursor to social

3

movements. Social movements can play a defining role where traditional political parties have failed to bring about desirable change for internal or external reasons. Annis (2003) has argued that in politically circumscribed societies, people look towards NGOs for short and long-term support to keep their dreams alive.

NGOs’ bargaining power within the political context of a country remains limited. NGOs can play a key role in social movements but they have limitations in realising the ultimate political goals11. Social movements are spontaneous, motivated by a popular idea or grievance, and expressed through a sudden eruption of public protest, rather than result of a ‘sustained organisational effort’12. Spontaneous social movements that triggered transition from authoritarian rule to civilian governance, such as in Chile, Philippines and currently in Pakistan in the form of an active Lawyers movement, have their limitations. They could not sustain the public support and ultimately have to relent or dilute their objectives. The NGO sector, which sided with such dramatic movements, has also been discredited for its lack of a post-transition vision. Thus, it is fair to say that civil society can be equally elitist and divorced from more durable paths of effecting change in a real sense.

On the other hand, there are NGOs and other civil society actors that are primarily focused on creating capacities and capabilities for change, without an explicit political programme. They work on development issues, but they are able to catalyse change and transformation, without being seen as party political. This is also true in the case of Northern Areas, where NGOs have largely treaded a non-confrontational, development oriented path.

It is not always easy for NGO to promote these objectives, without upsetting the government channels and donor networks. The role of NGOs within the broader scope of development and democracy is evolving continuously. To some degree, the NGO sector has become both a competitor and an accomplice of the state. The unenviable task of the civil society sector is to support and oppose the state at once, while alternating between the development and political rights of its constituencies.

Civil Society as a Catalyst for Social Change

This relationship between the state and the civil society sector is a precarious one. It calls for strategic engagement with the state for enabling policy, services and resources, but not at the cost of independent judgement. Again, the development-democracy discussion becomes relevant. In a democratic set up, the role of civil society is readily accepted and accommodated. Here the supplementary and complementary role of competent NGOs is naturally accepted and even rewarded as a missing service that the state sector cannot provide.

The larger, more democratic, better organized and more resourceful the public sector, the greater the incentive for the civil society to play its full role by interceding on behalf of the poor for a fair share of national resources and equal opportunity.13 On the other hand, within poor or politically repressed countries, there exists limited range of options for NGOs to play a meaningful role.

Jenny Pearce in “NGOs and social change: agents or facilitators” argues that NGOs can be the front voice of the poor and the helpless, a role that has evolved from facilitators of development processes to agents of change.14 The former role is important for ‘empowerment’ of the poor; enabling them to challenge the large scale power structures which blunts their development. Therefore it is no surprise that in areas with previous experience of either ‘repression or interventionist states’, people look positively on the role of NGOs’.15 This is due to the changing view that NGOs can help strengthen civil society through ‘empowerment’ and create a sphere which will protect a society ‘from the return of the intrusive state’.16 The idea is that NGO work can empower the powerless to fight their battles. This is specially the goal with the formation of new institutions, such as the World Social Forum; which works to encourage global civil society as the driver for social change. Thus NGO-State partnerships must be strategically formed, keeping in mind their priority to

4

the voiceless, their support to grassroots level organisation, while also forming an influencing relationship with the state.

To understand the workings of the debates above in practice, this paper will look at the case of the Northern Areas of Pakistan and will aim to analyse how the role of NGOs and state has evolved and interacted. To begin the analysis a general overview will be presented with a short introduction of the area, evolution of political setup, and the development impact of public-NGO partnership.

Context of Northern AreasSixty years after the Gilgit Rebellion and voluntary accession to Pakistan, the NAs are continued to be ruled from Islamabad through the Ministry of KANA, whose minister acts as the Chairman of the Northern Areas Legislative Assembly (NALA). The Minister/Chairman is responsible for policy, administration and development in NAs and also for signing legislation into laws.

The demand for fundamental rights by the people has so far been ignored by the government. Some residents of Northern Areas and Al Jihad Trust, therefore, filed two constitutional petitions in the Supreme Court seeking relief in the year 1994. A five-member bench of the Supreme Court gave its landmark judgement in the case in CP 17/1994 on May 28. 1999.

“…it was not understandable on what basis the people of the Northern Areas can be denied the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. We are of the view that the people of the Northern Areas are citizens of Pakistan for all intents and purposes. They have the rights to invoke any fundamental rights...' The Court went on to say: 'We allow the petitions and direct the respondent federation to initiate appropriate administrative-legislative measures within a period of six months from today to make necessary amendments in the Constitution...to ensure that the people in the Northern Areas enjoy their fundamental rights, namely, to be governed by their chosen representatives, and to have access to justice, inter alia, for the enforcement of their fundamental rights under the Constitution.” (Quoted in an article in the Daily News by M. Ismail Khan: 2005)

The court gave the government six months to amend the constitution; however, it took the Government six years to set up a Court of Appeals, and to upgrade the Northern Areas Legislative Council, but without any real authority. The Leader of the House was given the title of Chief Executive, but through a slight of hand, all the executive powers were given to the Chairman of NALA, who remains the Federal Minister of KANA, who is not elected locally. These amendments and orders fall far short of the clear and specific direction of the honourable Supreme Court.

“A municipal committee in Pakistan continues to have more powers than our legislature, in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court has given us the right to self-rule. This is nothing less than a blatant violation of the 1999 judgement” (Crisis group: Asia report N 131:2007).

Current Development StatusThe NAs are still considered as a poor part of Pakistan in terms of per capita income. The Socio-Economic Survey conducted by AKRSP in 2006 reported that the annual per capita income is only Pakistan Rupee (PKR) 8,676 (equal to 62 Pounds) which is about half the national average.17 However, the NAs have undergone a rapid process of socio-economic transformation in the past two and half decades. Income levels have risen roughly three times in real terms since 1991; poverty levels have declined from an estimated 67% of the population to about 25% during the same period. Head count poverty now stands at par with

5

national figures. Literacy levels for both men and women now surpass national averages (Ibid).

Government is the largest provider of development services and social protection. In recent years, public sector funding for NAs has increased significantly. The rapidly improving standards of living in NAs are the result of a number of factors, including consistently increasing trends in public sector investment, particularly the effect of improving road and telecommunication systems, and a well conceived development support system offered by the institutions of the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN), particularly the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP).

As a key development support organization with a strong civil society development agenda, AKRSP has been working closely with the government. This policy was based on the realization that the state had the primary responsibility to meet the development needs of its citizens and co-opting the state for the bottom up development was seen as the best guarantee for the continuation of the development efforts. Secondly, it recognized that the primary role of NGOs was to come up with innovative programmes and projects, which could only be scaled through government sponsorship.

This public-private partnership (PPP) between government and AKRSP flourished as a result of the demonstration of the efficacy and effectiveness of the participatory model. Shoaib Sultan Khan, the first General Manager of AKRSP, refers to creation of a concept called “champions of change” within the government. This was done on multiple levels: local level government officers accompanied AKRSP field staff to project areas to see firsthand results of community based programmes. The creation of NRSP and other RSPs led to a nation-wide movement for participatory rural development, which has emerged as the largest NGO sector in Pakistan.

Despite this close relationship with the government AKRSP has maintained a good degree of independence from institutions of the state, so that it wouldn’t drift from its primary mission to serving the poor.

Analysis

The fundamental question for the people of the Northern Areas is why successive governments in Pakistan have remained so reluctant to grant them their fundamental political and constitutional rights? The question is particularly important because the people of this remote region have fought a war in November 1947 to be full citizens of Pakistan. The next question is given the inability of Pakistani Government to accede to the legitimate rights of people in the Northern Areas, what should be their best course of action?

The failure of democracy has been the greatest tragedy in Pakistan, which has prevented it from achieving its ideals, including development of its people and equality of its citizens, as well as giving due rights to the minorities and marginalized areas, such as the Northern Areas. The root causes of Pakistan's economic and political woes lie in its feudal legacy and the winner-take-all approach to governing that has been practiced by successive civilian and military leaders.18 Like many other things in the country, democracy has also become a valued commodity monopolized by the ruling elite. In its current form, representative democracy imposed from the top will continue to remain a contest of power, prestige and political patronage within the ruling elites, dominated by the feudal lords. The military fits neatly into this well developed pattern of regime recycling, once the excesses of the previous civilian government reach a breaking point. The military has become a necessary part in this political drama; so are the sectarian lords, whose political capital has also enhanced with growing apathy and alienation of the population that remains largely poor and illiterate.

6

But then what is new? Political culture all over the world remains elitist, and for all practical purposes, the will of the people is just a notion in political theory. This cynicism apart, elections and other political processes are important steps for evolving democratic norms and institutions in the long-term. Moreover, there are no real alternatives to democratic discourse, and elections provide a unique and peaceful opportunity for leadership development and transition. The basic issue is how to improve and upgrade the political culture and increase meaningful participation by the majority of citizens, who are poor and illiterate and, therefore, prone to intrigue, manipulation and blackmail under the prevailing political culture.

The Northern Areas are the only part of the country without formal constitutional rights. But Pakistan has a dismal record in the rights of others also, including human rights, political rights of small provinces, women’s rights, minority rights, and so on. Thus there is a pattern to this denial of rights and it is rooted in its failure to develop and democratize its polity. This insecurity may be the main cause of lack of decentralization and devolution of political rights to the Northern Areas.

Successive governments in Pakistan have remained hostage to the issue of Kashmir, even when everyone realizes that settling this issue at terms favourable to Pakistan are remote. The last Military President tried to be innovative in this area but failed, because India would not make a deal with an undemocratic government in Pakistan. Only a well established democratic government in Pakistan can take the nation into confidence and settle the issue of Kashmir. Until then the Northern Areas have no chance to attain self-rule. Because of its strategic location, linking China and Central Asia with South Asia, Northern Areas will remain an important bargaining chip for both India and Pakistan.

In the meantime, in light of the Supreme Court’s verdict, the Federal Government is engaged in offering cosmetic changes, backed by political bribes in the form of significant development funds to the area. This being the current reality, what is it that the people, political leaders and civil society in the Northern Areas can do to promote their own ideals, i.e., democracy and development?

Fortunately, in the absence of a real role for political forces, civil society has flourished and it has also had a positive impact on the political development of the population. Most of the civil society activists, who were trained in development issues through AKRSP-supported Village and Women’s Organizations, are now elected members in District Councils and NALA. Unlike their counterparts in the rest of the country, they do not belong to political families dominated by feudal lords, but are educated, middle class individuals, well grounded in social and economic issue and development practice. A measure of this political maturity is that the local Legislative Assembly (NALA) has been completing its full term for a third consecutive time, while no provincial or national assembly in the rest of the country has completed a single term over the last 30 years.

Civil Society, a Surrogate for People’s Power?

Although, participatory democracy should remain an important goal, increasing citizens’ say in public affairs need not be limited to direct involvement in party politics—both are necessary. This can be achieved by other means, such as articulating citizens’ will through civil society action. This is a relatively new route paved by the communities in the Northern Areas, and has proven to be an effective method for promoting democracy in a real sense.

Civil society action is no substitute for public discourse through formal democratic institutions, but it can contribute to improving overall governance and participation in a variety of ways, including providing an additional check on the public sector actors and institutions through public debate, evidence-based scrutiny of public policy, resource allocation and other decisions. For instance, in many countries, including India, the alternative budgets prepared by the civil society groups through grassroots participation, are regarded as powerful tools to precipitate public debate. Forcing governments to do their

7

proper homework and defend or sometimes reverse their priorities and resource allocation decisions in the face of strong public criticism on some undemocratic or unsustainable actions.

More importantly, civil society action and participation in major challenges, such as poverty reduction, social justice, and delivery of social and livelihood services, makes them important and useful partners with public sector initiatives and programmes. Here the role of civil society is more supplementary and complementary to public sector policy and action. Without a doubt, the broad roles and functions played by the civil society, ranging from checking the excesses of the state, to complementing it by sharing the burden of development, makes them an indispensable part of the polity.

People in the Northern Areas, in addition to voicing their demand for legitimate political and constitutional rights, have been actively participating in civil society actions, particularly in issues dealing with local development. The broad-based community organizations, which are the bedrock of a strong civil society movement in the Northern Areas, have demonstrated that people power or social capital, if channelled in the right direction, can accomplish Herculean tasks. This action can become far more effective than typical government responses, in addressing major challenges, such as poverty reduction, managing natural resources wisely and in a sustainable manner, and in resolving intractable conflicts.

Social mobilization provides a missing link for greater participation of citizens and institutions, including government, business, community organizations, and NGOs in sustainable local development strategies. Experience throughout the world has demonstrated the limitations of over-reliance on governments to provide a full suite of social, economic and environmental services. A more institutionally plural approach to meeting local development challenges is, therefore, best guaranteed by a higher degree of collaboration between the state, civil society, and the business sector to improve stakeholder participation in local decision-making.

Lessons learned by AKRSP and other RSPs show that social mobilization techniques aimed at collective action are effective in overcoming a variety of handicaps common in many parts of rural Pakistan. This includes low endowment in natural resources, poor state of human capital and high levels of social fragmentation that lead to subsistence conditions.

Available evidence shows that social mobilization techniques are effective in: a) reaching out to all or most of the poor households; b) enhancing financial, social, physical, human and natural capital; c) increasing productivity, equity and sustainability in resources use and management; d) adding value to public and private sector services through economies of scale and cost and management sharing; and, e) in forging meaningful public-private partnerships (AKRSP; Valleys in Transition, 2006).

However, to succeed in these efforts, social mobilization interventions must be: a) promoted by apolitical, professional intermediaries; b) imbedded in the local institutional history; c) follow local preferences for organizational forms; d) infused with democratic norms; e) continuously renewed with organizational knowledge; f) backed by active government support; g) inclusive of all or the majority of households, especially poor; and, h) linked with public and private sector services (Ibid, p. 56).

Conclusion

People in the Northern Areas of Pakistan are engaged in a strange kind of struggle. They are making a case to be part of the mainstream political life of their country, as opposed to distancing themselves from it. And yet, they are told that they are a disputed region and therefore cannot be made part of Pakistan. In most cases involving territorial disputes, the argument is other way round. Even in the case of J&K, both India and Pakistan are trying to exclude each other from the territory in dispute, and have established special autonomous

8

governance systems for the parts that are under their control. Not even the relief provided by the country’s highest court has any significance, which is at least understandable, as it has now become an established fact that the only court decisions that matter are the ones made in favour of the government in Pakistan.

Because the Northern Areas is strategically important for Pakistan—it provides a land link with China through the Karakoram Highway, which is significant from a military point of view—the only way to keep people happy is by providing the area with generous financial support and impose no taxes. The people of the area have no incentive to change their mind about Pakistan as the situation of people in Indian-controlled Kashmir and the historical animosity and cultural differences with Kashmiries is a sufficient deterrence from entertaining any thoughts about opting for India. Although people are disappointed that their legitimate demands are not met, they are not going to turn away from their ultimate political goal to join Pakistan. In the meantime, people are building their capabilities and gradually and incrementally making reasonable progress on the development front.

The development potential of the Northern Areas is huge in terms of its water resources for hydropower, mineral resources, tourism potential and opportunities for trade and transit with China and Central Asia. The government has plans to build two mega hydropower projects in the area, and it has signed an agreement with China to widen the Karakoram Highway. There are also long-term plans for a rail link with China and even a pipeline for transporting energy to China from the Middle East. If the current development trends continue, the overwhelming majority of Northern Areas’ population will become literate in the next ten years. This will be a huge demographic dividend for the Northern Areas. With a literate population, a solid start in development, huge resource potential and a confident and informed civil society and, hopefully, stable democracy in the country, the dream of self-governance will be closer than ever and more meaningful and rewarding.

9

1REFERENCES

Raat ki Raani, News. 2007. “ India-Pakistan Partition: the Human Dimension” 2 Kenneth Thompson, 2002 edition. “ Emile Durkheim” 3 Kenneth T- Emile 4 Amartya Sen, 2001. “ Development as Freedoms”5 Sen ( Pg 297) 6 Speech to Board of Directors, North-South Institute By David Kilgour, Secretary of State. 7 Human Dev report 2002..8 Speech David Kilgour 9 Chandhoke, Neera. 1995. “State and Civil Society: Explorations in Political Theory”10 Neera Chandhake11 Ibid 11Pearce or Annis 12 Ibid 11Pearce of Annis 13 S. Annis, 1987. “Can small-scale development be a large-scale policy? The case of Latin America”14 J. Pearce, 2008. “ Development, NGOs and civil society; the debates and its future”15 Ibid 1116 Ibid 1117 AKRSP, March 2007. “An Assessment of Socio-Economic Trends in the Northern Areas and Chitral, Pakistan (1991-2005)”, Pakistan.18 Foreign Affairs, November/December 2002