|
|
|
|
|
Telangana
‘Break it to make it’ calls across country |
|
|
|
|
Telangana When the UPA leadership finally decided to bite the Telangana bullet and grant statehood for the region, comprising 10 districts, including Hyderabad, out of the total 23 in Andhra Pradesh (AP), it marked a sense of closure for a prolonged, violence-filled movement and fulfilment of a long-cherished dream of the 3.5 crore people. However, it also opened a Pandora’s Box, reviving old wounds, raising questions over viability of the new states and the future of Hyderabad, the bustling IT hub which has been a bone of contention between the protagonists and opponents of Telangana statehood. As per the road map laid down by the UPA, the Telangana state will be carved out of AP while Hyderabad, which forms the heart of Telangana region, will be the common capital for 10 years. A new capital is proposed to be built in ‘Seemandhra’, a term coined by the media to jointly refer to Rayalaseema, a backward, drought-prone region comprising four districts, and coastal Andhra, a relatively prosperous delta belt with nine districts. The bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, the first linguistic state in the country, raises more questions than it seeks to answer. Is the linguistic identity not enough to bind people? If backwardness is the yardstick to create new states, what about the perennially backward areas in the other two regions of Rayalaseema and coastal Andhra? If a relatively stable, industry-friendly and prosperous state like AP is split, will it not lose its sheen? Cultural disconnect The Telangana movement initially focused on backwardness of the region but soon became a campaign for self-pride and assertion of distinct cultural identity. The region was part of the erstwhile Hyderabad State ruled by the Nizams while Andhra was under Madras Presidency. It had a laidback lifestyle and a strong influence of Muslim culture while people from Andhra were known for their entrepreneurial skills, risk-taking abilities and better educational and living standards. It was thus a reluctant marriage when all Telugu-speaking regions were merged to form AP, the country’s first linguistic state in 1956. Since then, the yearning for a separate identity and perceived sense of alienation has repeatedly found public expression. Lack of irrigation, industry, and educational and employment opportunities has been the bane of the region. It was argued successive governments had not only neglected the region but also systematically exploited it. Though the common language acted as glue to hold them together, the yearning for statehood never really subsided. The first violent agitation of 1969 had subsided following a political agreement. However, the movement was revived with the launch of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) in 2001 by K. Chandrasekhar Rao and since then the statehood sentiment became an electoral instrument. Political chessboard Hanging fire for several decades, the UPA leadership put the issue on fast-track only in the recent weeks and decided to carve out a separate Telangana state in what is seen as a calculated gambit. The decision came in the wake of reports of the Congress stock falling across the state and a bleak outlook for the Lok Sabha elections. By carving out Telangana, the ruling party hopes to sweep the 2014 polls in the Telangana region, which accounts for 17 of the 42 seats in AP. With the process of putting in place the new state expected to be completed before the next Assembly elections, scheduled in May 2014, the Congress hopes to have another state in its kitty. The Congress had bagged 33 seats in the 2009 elections, the highest contribution by any state to the UPA kitty. Ten years into the government, the party is grappling with a strong anti-incumbency factor and desertions from its ranks. The death of the charismatic Congress Chief Minister YS Rajasekhar Reddy in a helicopter crash in September 2009 created a leadership vacuum in the state. By granting statehood to Telangana, the Congress hopes to neutralise two of its main rivals — Telugu Desam Party chief N. Chandrababu Naidu, whose ambivalence on Telangana led to erosion of his party’s support, and YS Jagan Mohan Reddy, who is seen as a formidable force in Seemandhra. Despite opposition within, the Congress decided to play the Telangana card since the BJP had already promised to grant statehood in the event of the NDA coming to power. For the main opposition TDP, the bifurcation could prove detrimental. The YSR Congress Party, on the other hand, is expected to capitalise on the public anger in its stronghold, Seemandhra. Question of survival Post-bifurcation, the two entities will have to start with deficit budgets and depend heavily on the Centre for funds. It is estimated a whopping Rs 3 lakh crore is required to build a new capital for Andhra, complete with administrative complexes, Assembly, courts, international airport, industrial townships and centres of excellence. The Union Government may have to give a huge special fund for the purpose. The sharing of river waters is bound to be contentious. As Telangana will become the upper riparian state for the two major river systems of Krishna and Godavari, there are fears in Seemandhra that its irrigation projects will be starved. On the loss of revenue, the Centre will have to allocate out of the Central taxes an additional amount that will bring Seemandhra region on a par with Telangana on a pro-rata basis. In terms of revenues, Telangana will be a big blow to the residual AP as it now accounts for nearly 70 per cent of the state’s revenues. Barring Hyderabad, the Telangana region is bereft of any major industry and has poor irrigation coverage. However, it has vast deposits of coal, accounting for 20 per cent of the country’s coal deposits, and limestone. Being mostly an upland area, it requires lift irrigation projects on a massive scale, entailing huge costs. It was once a stronghold of Maoists, with several areas virtually under their control. There are fears of revival of Naxalite activity. At present, almost the entire top leadership of the CPI (Maoist) is from Telangana. Despite a sense of betrayal in Seemandhra, it can actually benefit from the division in the long run. Endowed with the country’s second longest coastline of 1,000 km, vast gas reserves, a string of ports and fertile, canal-irrigated lands, the coastal region has immense potential for growth. The business and construction activities associated with the new capital city could boost the economy. The 140-km long Petroleum, Chemicals and Petrochemical Investment Region (PCPIR), stretching from Visakhapatnam to Kakinada, and a string of mega power projects in the pipeline could well become the game-changers. Once the emotions subside and politicians on either side accept the new reality, the two Telugu states can chart out their own destiny without acrimony.
|
|
‘Break it to make it’ calls across country
THE decision of the Congress-led UPA government at the Centre to carve out a separate Telengana state from Andhra Pradesh has stoked similar demands from other parts of the country. Last week, Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde admitted there were a dozen-odd demands from various quarters, including five in the Northeast, four in UP, one in West Bengal and three elsewhere. Shinde, however, ruled out a second states reorganisation commission, turning back on a suggestion the Congress had itself tendered to the Atal Behari Vajpayee-led NDA government in 2001. On the day the Congress announced the Telengana decision, AICC general secretary Digvijay Singh reminded the country the Vajpayee government had rejected the party’s demand. Now it has joined the league in repudiating its own view on the need for an institutional arrangement to study demands for new states vis-à-vis the criteria. Linguistically speaking It is well known that the First States Reorganisation Commission set up in 1953 under Justice Fazal Ali was mandated to study redrawing internal boundaries on linguistic basis, a principle that has been since diluted to accommodate demands on the grounds to tackle growing disparities within regions in a state while analysts have seen the development from the prism of political expediency. In 1947, the Constituent Assembly had set up the SK Dhar Commission, which recommended that instead of language, the criteria should include geographical contiguity, financial self-reliance, administrative viability and potential for development that was endorsed by the Congress in 1948 through a committee that had Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabh Bhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitarammaiah. However, when Potti Sriramulu gave up his life following a fast for a separate state for Telugu-speaking people of Madras Presidency, the government created Andhra Pradesh in 1953. The last time demands for new states gained ground was in 2000, after the NDA government created Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal (now Uttarakhand). The argument in favour of these states was to speed up development and address complaints of discrimination. “Small is beautiful” goes the saying, and it was felt that by reducing the spread, delivery and governance would improve. Minnows gain Uttarakhand, being a hill state, gets preferential treatment in allocation of resources from the Centre. Endowed with natural resources, Jharkhand was said to be in a better position as compared to Bihar, the state from which it separated. Chhattisgarh too had natural reserves in the form of coal and minerals. Statistics available in public domain indicate that during the past 12 years, Jharkhand had a 10 percentage point increase in annual foodgrain production as compared to parent Bihar, while Chhattisgarh recorded 2 percentage point increase as compared to 4 percentage points by Madhya Pradesh. Uttarakhand recorded an impressive 1 percent point growth that equalled Uttar Pradesh, despite the fact that UP has greater land than Uttarakhand. Now Bihar, which had to part with Jharkhand, is complaining of lack of resources and seeking a special economic package. There are other parameters to measure the growth indices, including literacy rate and better health care, but the larger argument whether smaller states are better government than bigger ones continues. Leading the divide According to former Panchayati Raj Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar, both large and small states will continue to be badly governed until there is effective devolution of “funds, functions and functionaries to local authorities”. Participating in a debate a few years back, Aiyar argued: “It is only with empowerment of local communities that people will secure their entitlement to basic goods and services…. whether it is a small state like Sikkim or a big one like Bihar, good governance depends on the extent to which power is devolved’’. Endorsing his demand for a smaller UP, Union Minister and RLD president Ajit Singh cites the example of Haryana that was carved out of Punjab and is today among the more developed states. Advocating a Harit Pradesh in western UP, Ajit Singh maintains people of western UP “see for themselves how their neighbours in Haryana and Uttarakhand have prospered. Their per capita income is much higher than in western UP.” Swift progress and equitable growth, of course, makes strong grounds, but the flip side of political instability remains. The experience of Jharkhand is a case in point where during the past 12 years, the state has seen eight chief ministers, including the unique distinction of an Independent, Madhu Koda, holding the
post, besides President’s rule on three occasions.
SEEKING TO GO FREE
Bundelkhand After the carving out of Uttarakhand in 2000, UP faces the threat of another division. While the demand for a separate Bundelkhand, based on the dialect of a region spread across UP and MP, has been raised for decades, the Mayawati government in 2011 had passed a resolution demanding UP be cut into four – Poorvanchal, Bundelkhand, Paschim and Avadh Pradesh. However, the Samajwadi Party is opposed to it. The Rashtriya Lok Dal is demanding a Harit Pradesh, with Meerut, Muzaffarnagar and Ghaziabad. Gorkhaland The demand for a separate UT since the 1980s turned violent after Gorkha National Liberation Front leader Subhash Ghisingh raised the demand for a separate state for Nepali-speaking people in the north-west Bengal areas of Darjeeling, Dooars and Terai. The movement led to the formation of a Hill Council. The now active Gorkha Janmukti Morcha under Bimal Gurung has revived the demand. Karbi-Anglong The demand for a separate state in the central part of Assam turned violent last week when protesters gheraoed the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council in Diphu. Bodoland Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) chief Hagrama Mohilary has decided to organise a mass rally on August 4 to demand a separate state. The Bodo Liberation Tigers Force had an agreement with the Centre and Assam to create the BTC in 2003, allowing the body to govern four districts. In 2010, the BTC passed a resolution for a separate state. Vidarbha The Maharashtra region comprises Nagpur and Amravati divisions. The Vidarbha Joint Action Committee has revived the demand. Former Union Minister Vilas Muttemwar wrote to Congress president Sonia Gandhi on the issue, underscoring that people in other parts of the state were not opposed to it. The Shiv Sena is opposed; the NCP is not. Kodava Kodagu was one of the smallest districts in Karnataka that was amalgamated with the then Mysore state against the wishes of its residents. The British annexed the area in 1834 and named it Coorg. The Codava National Council is now demanding an autonomous homeland.
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
THE unhappy marriage has finally ended. But, the divorce settlement is set to be long, tortuous and heart-breaking. Like any incompatible marriage, the Telangana tangle had its share of acrimony, betrayals and unkept promises.
A complex web of challenges lies ahead. Apart from the emotional upheaval and a deep sense of loss that the bifurcation has triggered in Seemandhra, the nitty-gritty of resources sharing, river waters issues, funding for the new capital and sustaining industrialisation and employment generation is going to be a gigantic task.
