The scenic riverside valley of Balakot is covered with green grass and flowery trees, a sign that spring has finally arrived. But for Mohammad Arshad there is nothing to cheer. As he attends a customer at his small and newly built grocery shop, he worries about the news he is getting almost every day from his colleagues in the market. 'They say the government is shifting the town to another place, as it is not safe to stay here,' he says. 'First, nature robbed us and now the government wants to snatch whatever is left.' Mr Arshad, 48, was one of the lucky survivors after a deadly earthquake six months ago destroyed his town, once a famous tourist destination in Pakistan's Northwest Frontier Province. The 7.6-magnitude quake that killed more than 80,000 people in Northern Pakistan, Kashmir and parts of India on October 8 last year also reduced the city of Balakot to rubble. Mr Arshad lost his son, father-in-law, shops and a house in the tragedy. 'The quake has deprived me of what I've collected over 30 long years.' Adding to his woes has been the news about the possible shifting of the town. A team of foreign experts has suggested relocating the ruined city which lies directly on a fault line. They said the land in Balakot had developed cracks, with wide gaps appearing at several places. In the case of another major earthquake, the loss to life and property could be devastating. The government has since announced its plan to shift the city to a new location and asked the residents not to build new constructions. 'How can we leave this place?' Mr Arshad said. 'We have been here for centuries. We have got our land and businesses here, no matter whatever of that is now left.' The quake could not have come at a worse time for Mr Arshad. He was in the process of recovering money from clients who always borrow from the shop before paying him back after the harvest at the end of the year. 'Millions of our rupees are stuck,' he said. He sees little chance of getting his money back if the city is moved. 'The purpose of restarting the shop, in part, was to recover the stuck amount, which now does not look possible.' Mr Arshad is not the only one opposing the move. Mohammad Alam, 60, a retired school teacher, who lost his house in the quake, said the only people in Balakot favouring the move were those who never owned a house there. 'They have nothing to lose,' he said. 'Instead, they will get new houses. Before the quake they were living in rented homes.' Mr Alam is living in a tent close to his collapsed house, which he plans to rebuild soon. 'Nobody wants to leave his native land, and neither do we,' he said. 'The graves of our near and dear ones are here, and we have to live and die on our own land.' Thirty-six-year-old Mohammad Akbar thinks a new city would not be as good for his business as the old one. 'We have established businesses here,' he said. 'This advantage will be lost once we move to the new place, where we'll have to start from scratch.' Mr Akbar's clothes shop on the main street is one of a handful that survived the earthquake. Balakot has witnessed several protest rallies in recent days. Those opposing the move include people from surrounding villages who, although not directly affected by the relocation, fear losing a convenient place that has long provided them with their daily supplies. Although the site for the new city has not been formally announced, Shakeel Khan, a top official from the nearby town of Mansehra, said a location named Bakaryaal had been selected. 'It is about 20km from the old Balakot city and lies outside the red zone,' he said, referring to the danger zone around the destroyed city. Authorities claim that a majority favours the resettlement plan, and no one is being forced to leave. 'People understand that the relocation is for their safety,' Mr Khan said. 'We welcome all those who opt for the scheme. Those who do not want to leave will remain in their places.' However, there are indications that the people are being discouraged to stay. New construction in Balakot has been banned. Some non-government organisations which were building a hospital and schools in the city were stopped and advised to make only temporary shelters. 'We were asked not to build permanent concrete structures here,' said Fatima, the only female doctor working at the makeshift hospital established by a local mobile-phone company. The government also cancelled a recent contract for widening the road leading to the town, and there are plans to shift the town's banks to Mansehra. 'They are distributing pamphlets saying that no hospital, school or bank would be built here,' Mr Arshad said. 'If there are no banks, there will be no investment. And if there is no investment, there will be no business. They simply want us leave.' Although a detailed survey for the new city will start soon, the government has yet to offer a plan or explain where thousands of survivors will stay for the next five or so years while the new town is built. 'We are working on the details about how and where to accommodate the affected population and hope that everything will be finalised soon,' said Altaf Saleem, chief of the reconstruction work in Islamabad. However, creating settlements for the thousands of people living in temporary camps scattered across the province will be a difficult task. People in the surrounding tent villages who had been expecting to go return to their homes are not happy with the latest developments. 'We have been here for the last six months and only God knows how we have managed to survive the winter,' said Abdul Ghani, 46, a resident of a nearby camp. Mr Ghani lost his wife and a 14-year-old son in the earthquake, before he moved to the camp with his three remaining children. 'We are now getting ourselves ready to go back to our land and start rebuilding the house, and now they say we can not go there.' Opposition to the resettlement is not simply for economic reasons. People of the area generally live in small clusters, often with one extended family sharing one compound. To get them to agree to smaller houses surrounded by strangers will be a difficult task for the administration. 'We are used to living together in big houses.' Mr Akbar said. 'How can we survive in the two-room house they are going to give us? Houses there will be close to each other, with no privacy for our women. This is unacceptable.' Amid a roar of opposition, however, there are those who believe relocation is good for them. 'If the city is indeed that dangerous to live in, then we should not oppose the move,' said 22-year-old Danish Iqbal, who has just reopened his drinks shop. 'Nothing is worth more than your life.' Officials admit compensating every survivor is not possible, and providing adequate quake-proof shelters remains their top priority. 'It would be wrong to assume that we can replace each and every penny that they have lost,' Mr Khan said. 'We are only doing what is possible within the limited resources we have.'
