Mulkhow Development Movement Needs United Action, Not Endless Opinions – Muhammad Saeed
The Mulkhow Development Movement’s call for a public gathering on 23 June is not merely a local event; it is the latest expression of a long-standing demand that has shaped the lives of thousands of people for years. The demand itself is simple and reasonable: the complete construction and blacktopping of the Mulkhow Road.
For the people of the area, this is not a political slogan or a symbolic cause. It is a practical necessity linked directly to mobility, economic opportunity, access to essential services, and human dignity. Although some work has reportedly begun, residents believe that partial progress cannot be mistaken for completion. Their concern is not whether a project has started but whether it will be completed according to the commitments made to the public.
This reality is not unique to Mulkhow. Across Upper Chitral, including Torkhow, Terich, and other remote valleys, roads are far more than infrastructure projects. They are lifelines. A road provides access to hospitals, schools, markets, employment opportunities, emergency services, and government institutions. It connects isolated communities to the wider world.
When roads remain incomplete for years, the consequences are immediate and painful. Patients reach hospitals late. Students travel under difficult and sometimes dangerous conditions. Farmers struggle to transport their produce to markets. Businesses face higher costs, and entire communities remain disconnected from economic development. What appears on paper as an unfinished project translates into daily hardship for thousands of citizens.
The frustration generated by such conditions is neither irrational nor unexpected. Across Upper Chitral, public demonstrations over infrastructure concerns have become increasingly common. Communities that have waited years for promised development are no longer willing to accept indefinite delays. Their demands are not extraordinary; they are asking for basic infrastructure that should already exist.
For this reason, the demands emerging from Mulkhow deserve to be taken seriously. They are rooted in lived experience rather than political convenience. They reflect years of waiting, repeated assurances, delayed implementation, and concerns about accountability. Communities have listened to speeches, attended meetings, and heard announcements from elected representatives and government officials. Yet roads are not built through speeches. They are built through planning, funding, supervision, and execution.
Movements such as the Mulkhow Development Movement play an important role in democratic society because they transform scattered frustration into organized civic action. They provide a platform through which communities can collectively articulate their concerns, present their demands, and seek peaceful solutions. At their best, such movements strengthen accountability and encourage responsive governance.
Yet alongside this genuine struggle lies another challenge—one that extends far beyond road construction and reflects a broader weakness within society.
Whenever a public issue gains attention, a flood of opinions follows. Some voices are informed and constructive. Others are sincere but lack adequate knowledge. Still others are motivated by personal attention, political interests, or social-media visibility. As more voices enter the conversation, the original issue often becomes buried beneath speculation, assumptions, and distractions.
A movement that should be guided by evidence, documentation, and clear objectives can gradually lose focus when everyone begins presenting themselves as an authority.
Modern communication has made this problem more visible than ever. Social media has democratized public expression, which is, in many ways, a positive development. Citizens should be able to question authority, demand transparency, and advocate for their rights. Public participation is an essential feature of any healthy democracy.
The problem arises when confidence replaces competence.
Today, many people feel compelled to comment on every issue regardless of whether they possess the knowledge necessary to understand it. Complex subjects such as public finance, development planning, engineering, economics, law, and governance are often discussed with remarkable certainty by individuals who have never studied them in depth.
This tendency becomes especially visible whenever a national budget is announced. Within hours, social media feeds, tea shops, offices, marketplaces, and community gatherings become arenas of passionate debate. Citizens have every right to discuss public finances because government decisions affect everyone. However, meaningful criticism requires understanding.
Pakistan’s federal budget for the fiscal year 2026–27 provides a useful example. The federal government has presented a budget with a total outlay of Rs18.771 trillion. It has set an ambitious FBR revenue target of Rs15.264 trillion, allocated Rs8.054 trillion for debt-servicing and mark-up payments, earmarked Rs3 trillion for defence, and reserved Rs1 trillion for the federal Public Sector Development Programme. The government has also projected economic growth of 4 percent and average inflation of 8.2 percent. These are not simple figures scribbled into a household ledger. They represent decisions involving taxation, debt management, development priorities, national security, public welfare, and economic stability.
Yet moments after such a budget is announced, countless people begin prescribing simple solutions to deeply complex problems. Many who cannot explain the difference between revenue expenditure and development expenditure suddenly become economic experts. Many who have never read a budget document confidently explain how the entire national economy should be managed.
Citizens should absolutely question public policy. They should criticize governments when criticism is warranted. But there is an important distinction between informed criticism and uninformed commentary. Without knowledge, debate produces noise. With knowledge, it can produce reform.
The same principle applies to local development movements.
A driver may understand the hardships caused by a damaged road. A shopkeeper may appreciate the economic consequences of poor infrastructure. A student may feel the burden of difficult travel conditions. Their experiences are valuable and deserve respect. However, successful advocacy requires more than frustration.
An effective movement must understand the technical dimensions of the issue. It must know how much funding was approved, how much has been released, who is responsible for implementation, what standards were specified in official documents, what work has been completed, and what obligations remain unmet. Without such information, public pressure risks becoming emotional rather than strategic.
History shows that successful civic movements are not driven merely by anger; they are driven by organization.
A movement without leadership becomes a crowd. A crowd without direction becomes confusion. Confusion weakens even the most legitimate cause.
This is why communities such as Mulkhow, Torkhow, and other parts of Upper Chitral need responsible and credible leadership. Leadership is not measured by the volume of one’s voice or the number of followers one commands online. True leadership requires understanding the issue, gathering evidence, engaging constructively with officials, maintaining unity, and keeping the movement focused on its objectives.
Public pressure is most effective when it is disciplined.
If the demand is the complete construction and blacktopping of the Mulkhow Road, then that demand must remain clear and consistent. The movement should avoid becoming entangled in unnecessary political rivalries, personal disputes, or unrelated grievances. Every additional distraction risks weakening the central message.
Governments and bureaucracies often respond more quickly when citizens are united, informed, and organized. Conversely, confusion and division create opportunities for delay and inaction. Clarity is therefore not merely a communication strategy; it is a source of political strength.
There is also a moral dimension to this discussion. Every society depends upon a culture of responsibility. Citizens have the right to speak, but rights are most powerful when accompanied by accountability. The Qur’an instructs believers not to pursue matters about which they have no knowledge, while the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ emphasized the importance of responsible and beneficial speech. These teachings remain deeply relevant in an age where information travels instantly and misinformation spreads just as quickly.
The challenge facing society today is not a shortage of opinions. There is a shortage of informed opinions.
Too often, public debate rewards confidence more than accuracy. Loud voices attract attention, while careful analysis struggles to compete. Social media has amplified this tendency, enabling rumours, assumptions, and accusations to spread rapidly across communities. Genuine causes can be damaged when misinformation overshadows facts.
The people of Mulkhow have every right to demand better roads. Indeed, they have a responsibility to do so. Silence has rarely solved problems of neglect or underdevelopment. But their cause will be strongest when passion is combined with evidence, unity, discipline, and strategic leadership.
The gathering on 23 June should therefore represent more than public frustration. It should demonstrate civic maturity. It should show that the people are not only aware of their rights but also committed to pursuing those rights through peaceful, organized, and informed action.
The lesson extends beyond Mulkhow and beyond Upper Chitral. It speaks to a broader truth about society. Public voice is essential, but voice without responsibility becomes noise. Criticism is valuable, but criticism without knowledge becomes confusion. Protest is a democratic right, but protest without organization becomes a weakness.
The strength of a society lies not in the number of opinions it produces, but in the quality of the thinking behind them. When knowledge, responsibility, and unity guide public action, even the most remote communities can compel attention and bring about meaningful change. But when opinion becomes louder than responsibility, society may hear many voices while losing sight of the direction it needs most.
Muhammad Saeed
Mulkhow, Chitral
