Observations

Ethnographic methods allowed me to interact with local elites, and to observe how the local elites interact with people. A crucial part of ethnographic research is participant observations, through which I collected the majority of my data. Observations of these interactions on the ground helped unravel a body of knowledge useful to understanding political settlements. I used participant observations not only to observe the cultures in FATA and KPK, but also to gain an in-depth insight about the political functions of local elites, their actions, interpretations, aspirations, motivations, and the

106

processes by means of which the local elites negotiated and operated around political reforms (Jones, 1996, p.450).

Throughout my fieldwork I constantly observed events so as to develop an understanding of the everyday politics, and the strategies used by local elites in Jamrud Tehsil and Nowshera District. I used participant observation for several reasons. First, I was keen to interact with a number of individuals in both formal and informal ways, while at the same time observing the overall field setting; people entering the offices, the ways they interacted with officials and citizens, and so on. More so, I took note of all the participations and observations in the field (Ervin, 2000). I was explicitly aware of the events taking place in the settings; raising awareness of the delicacies of the interactions, observing them from a distance, as they sometimes unfolded in front of me (Spardley, 1980). At times, the Maliks would ask if I would like to observe the Jirga which took place in the political administration office. I spent months in research setting, visited the site frequently from early morning and left around 4 pm, and this gave me a number of opportunities to observe important events. I used the observations to collect a wide range of data, observing things like the effect of Maliks and brokers visiting the office, and how they changed the overall dynamics, i.e. with regard to people approaching them, officials becoming alert, their interactions with people, and processes of facilitating common people. Moreover, observations in informal ways allowed me to take note of how people generally reacted to events (Alasuutari, 1998) with regard to the likes of access to state resources, favouritism, nepotism, alliances of local elites, and protests in daily routine life. There were some events or discussions which I thought were less significant, these emerged as crucial data sources later during the data analysis. The analysis processes were ongoing and continuous, during and after my fieldwork. As such, I took note of similar observations like loud noises, disputes and complaints, which were common to office settings (Robson, 2002).

In the early part of my fieldwork, I attended numerous workshops conducted in Islamabad, Peshawar and even political gatherings organised in public places or small gatherings in private houses. The workshops in Islamabad included high dignitary officials from the donor community, FATA students, members of civil society, members of the Senate, and representatives of various political parties. These workshops were purposively organised to give national traction to reforms in the FATA region. In these workshops I observed the narrative of people belonging to diverse schools of thought. I took note of all the speeches made by participants. A purpose of one of these workshops was to provide a networking opportunity for the participants. I made use of these spaces and spent my time observing the nature of the discussions. I participated in workshops in Peshawar University organised by the Department of Journalism and International Relations. The prime focus of these workshops attended by students from

107

FATA was to address certain laws in FATA, and reforms to be made to Article 40 of the FCR. Broadly, these workshops were helpful in determining the role of academia and the donor community in creating awareness and engaging different segments of society, but I was more interested in exploring the understanding of political reforms at the regional level. Although I derived a blurred understanding of the nature of the existing institutional setup, and the need for change in the institutional setup, I felt that there were still plenty of questions left unanswered.

I was particularly focused on covering the multiple interpretations of PPA made by local elites in the FATA region. I visited Jamrud Tehsil where the Maliks interact with people and state officials on a daily basis. I intended to observe the nature of interactions between the general public, Maliks and public officials. Additionally the intention was to better understand the blurred boundaries that enable spaces for Maliks to seek economic and political gains in governance. Attending political gatherings gave me the chance to observe the ways in which strategies are devised by local elites in order to establish a local presence in governance. These observations were useful in making sense of how local elites manage networks as students, civil society, and elites from other areas were also invited.

In both research sites, I immersed within the events as an ‘active’ participant, as I got involved in small case events to understand the internal dynamics of micro-politics. I always introduced myself as someone concerned with understanding the daily functioning of public life, the political life of local elites, the type of challenges they encounter, and how they overcome these challenges. Active participation included facilitating people with daily governance cases, while keeping away from influencing decisions. Yin (2006) rightly indicates that the exploratory nature of case studies is based around a pre-established criterion and is useful to understand the events that shape the actions of individuals and the overall perception of the subject under review. The case events illustrated the dynamics of micro politics that I was trying to explore. I was talking to people in the abstract, rather than talking directly about PPA. Through participating in these case events, it allowed me to make sense of how different parties were in dispute over civil matters. I looked at these cases, with the consent of a number of the parties involved and made inquiries about their nature to the relevant officers. The purpose here was to make inquiries as opposed to resolving those cases. These cases were extremely useful in the production of ‘thick’ data, understanding the operation of routine politics, and the micro details contained therein.

While handling these cases, it opened up avenues to explore, unfold, and make distinctions between events, in terms of what people witness ‘front stage’, and what is often inaccessible - the ‘backstage’ events (Goffman, 1959, cited by Devine, 1999, p.118). I observed that community members visited public offices on a routine basis. I observed that individuals generally preferred to meet officials

108

privately and out of view of other village community members. During these observations, a number of things transpired which would otherwise have been impossible to capture through interviews. I observed that while official rules define the criteria of access to resources, in reality the elites control the redistribution of resources for political gains. The interpretation of rules is orchestrated to best suit the interest of influential parties. To a layman, it is difficult to challenge the exercise of unofficial practices as employed by officials. As a local, I had prior knowledge of such malpractices in various departments in Pakistan and my personal experiences of witnessing them were useful validations. The techniques adopted thus supported my decision to explore the undisclosed perspectives in interviews. In these interactions I noted that common citizens handed money out ranging from 500 to 20,000 rupees (roughly £3.50–£135) (depending on the nature of the work) as a token of gratitude (generally referred as ‘chai-pani’ (meaning tea-water) for legal or sometimes illegal services. When observing these events, I often interacted with the general public to explore the reasons why many are compelled to engage in such practises. Common answers I would get were ‘sa oko’ (what can we do) or ‘bala lar

neshta’ (there is no other way).

Below, I outline the numerous informal discussions I had with multiple stakeholders to explore the nature of arrangements in state-society relationships.