The word Telangana still remains a buzz word in public discourse from the time centre announced that it wants to initiate the process which will culminate in creating a new state Telangana. The announcement was the reaction to the hunger strike carried out by the relatively powerful force TRS (Telangana Rashtria Samithi).It is true that we have digested exhaustive rhetoric for and against carving out Telangana from the existing state. We have to consider many after effects and also the effects if the Telangana is not carved out. Many aspects demand due consideration before we pass our judgments. It’s a common sense that we start our discussion from state re-organization commission. It is a known fact that our government is adept in creating committee’s and commissions. For our founding fathers it was an easy task to divide this subcontinent in to different states based on the linguistic lines which seems to be an obvious option. Our collective intelligence is evolved to a stage currently where we are demanding to form new states based on the development pattern and other social indices, truly we are improving.
The persecution of the Telangana people is not new but started from the time it came under Delhi sultanate rule in 14th century. We know that the ruler’s intention was never the welfare of people,any ways that is a thing of past now we are in the so called liberal democratic set up and listening to every one is important.40 percent of Andhra’s population lives in this region and significant number of this flock is understandably downtrodden. We have few theories which confirms that the primary reason of this area becoming a hot bed for naxalism is due to the indifference shown towards them by the elite ( political parties who ruled).Telangana contributes to the 70 % of the revenue of the state but relatively many social indices are alarmingly low.
Are there any risks?
Ideally there are no risks in carving out a new state but one which is water (But this should not become the reason for not carving out Telangana). In British parlance divide and conquer was/is an effective tool to govern people as long as there is a reasonable justification. Water disputes are well known between different Indian states – the most renown is apparently Cauvery river issue between Tamil nadu and Karnataka. We don’t seem to have lasting solution but it only helped different parties to score some political points at the time of elections. Within the state of Andhra Pradesh, 68.5% of the catchment area of the Krishna River and 69% of the catchment area of the Godavari River are in the Telangana region. Creating Telangana will result to be an act equal to sowing ambivalence and this will lead to vicious cycle of water war between people of the same state (India).Irrespective of whether the water tribunals which are existing for the purpose of arbitration in disputes between states pass reasonable judgments, the regional parties don’t waste time in terming them as judicial apathy possibly to appease the regionalists. One near example is recent award of KWDT-2 (Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal -2) and the parties involved are maharastra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh. Right wing rhetoric says that behind the demand of a new state there is a hidden agenda of Evangelical Army (of course an allegation).When the recent spell of violence erupted after the denial of centre to initiate the resolution in the state and in the centre many untoward incidents occurred. One of them was the Telanganites demanded that residents of coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema must go from Telangana, this is uncalled for. After all the demand is to create a new state and we should not see this as if we are carving out Pakistan from India.
Should we create another one?
Why not another state, lets try and what is wrong in doing that. We split the whole Assam, we did it in Bihar, MadhyaPradesh.The only difference between the six point formula of 1973 which was an output of political settlement and the recent Sri Krishna commission’s report is clear, while the former did not make an explicit mention of creating a new state but the latter does. The bone of contention seems to be who gets Hyderabad. The Telangana proponents assert that they would settle for nothing less than a Telangana state with Hyderabad as capital. Statements like keeping Andhra united would sound hollow with out a strong rationale. The People of Andhra are capable of picking up another capital of their own. Expecting the birth of yet another new baby (Telangana) from mother India. We are looking for bold decisions either from Janpath or Race Course road as we know they are the epicenters of power.
After all the government is not facing the Nizam’s resistance of joining Indian union but Telanganites who want a separate state.
No comments:
Post a Comment