With the situation in Andhra Pradesh virtually spiraling out of
control and the union government, which triggered the chaos, becoming a
mere spectator, the time has come for social and political leaders from
across the political divide to display some statesmanship and initiate
measures to cool tempers in both parts of the state and bring the
warring groups back to the negotiating table.
While the Union Government and the Congress Party watch helplessly
as the law and order situation in the Seemandhra region spirals out of
control and party discipline has be thrown out of the window, Telugu
Desam leader Mr.Chandrababu Naidu and the YSR Congress leader
Mr.Jaganmohan Reddy are blaming Delhi and adding fuel to the fire. While
it is true that the turmoil and uncertainty prevailing in the state can
be traced to the myopic and desperate decisions taken by a ruling party
merely for short-term political gain, one must guard against
irretrievable constitutional breakdown and damage to the social fabric.
The situation on the ground is so explosive that it calls for some
initiative by a team of national elders. Partisan politics cannot douse
these fires.
But, before we look for solutions, a look at the events that led to
the current conflagration. Troubled by its waning influence in a large
state like Andhra Pradesh that sends 42 MPs to the Lok Sabha, the
Congress Working Committee (CWC) passed a resolution of July 30 last,
urging the Union Government to take steps to divide Andhra Pradesh and
create a separate Telangana state. The CWC resolution triggered
conflicting emotions in the Telangana and Andhra regions. There was
jubilation in the areas which would constitute the new state and violent
agitations in the other regions of the state. Thereafter, there have
been tensions in all the three regions of the state – Telangana,
Rayalaseema and Coastal Andhra – because of the absence of clarity on
many fundamental issues pertaining to the creation of the new state. For
example, there is much confusion on the status of Hyderabad. Telangana
does not want Hyderabad to be a Union Territory which will be home to
the capitals of both Telangana and Seemandhra. The people of Seemandhra
do not want Hyderabad to be wholly a part of Telangana. Meanwhile, the
people of Rayalaseema feel they have been short-changed.
Two months have gone by and the ruling dispensation in Delhi appears
all at sea on how to implement the Congress Party’s resolution. A
high-powered committee headed by Defence Minister Mr.A.K.Anthony was set
up to examine all these issues and untangle the mess. Meanwhile,
without waiting for Anthony et al to complete their deliberations, the
government decided to go ahead with the division of the state and set up
a Group of Ministers to work out the modalities. The GoM is to work out
the nitty-gritty of bifurcation of the state including assets, revenues
and liabilities. Meanwhile, both the Union Government and the Congress
leadership has to contend with the virtual revolt of the Andhra Pradesh
Chief Minister Mr Kiran Kumar Reddy, who has blasted the party high
command for taking such a sensitive decision without proper
consultations and deliberation on the consequences of bifurcation of the
state.
The Chief Minister is so angry with his party that he said a few days
ago that he never thought a day would come when “I have to choose
between my party-Congress- and my state. I would not wish such a
quandary to even my worst enemy. But if I, as CM of this state, allow
this to happen, future generations of Telugu people won’t forgive me”.
He said he stood for a united Andhra Pradesh even when he was an MLA
and there was no change in his stance. Challenging the party’s decision,
he said “the CWC has taken this decision but as the Chief Minister, I
have a responsibility to this state and its people not to allow this
mistake to be carried forward”. He said the party had decided to form
Telangana without any discussion on important issues like water-sharing,
irrigation, status of government employees etc.
The Chief Minister’s rebellious attitude became clear when he
publicly declared that he felt like joining the agitationists who wanted
Andhra to remain united. Given the amount of turmoil in all the three
regions of the state, one wonders what lies ahead on the Telangana
question.
The CWC’s decision to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh and create the state
of Telangana has triggered a rash of demands for new states – a
development that does not augur well from a national unity point of
view. Already, a dozen new demands have sprung up. The Bodos and the
Gorkhas have resumed their agitations for creation of Bodoland and
Gorkhaland; Ms.Mayawati has reiterated her demand for breaking up Uttar
Pradesh into four states – Purvanchal, Bundelkhand, Awadh Pradesh and
Paschim Pradesh; Mr.Ajit Singh has once again raised the flag of Harit
Pradesh; politicians of Vidharbha have suddenly re-discovered the
virtues of a separate Vidarbha State; the Coorgis are clamouring for a
separate state and finally, there are political parties in Tamil Nadu
who want to break up the Tamil state.
After keeping the Telangana issue on the backburner for close to 60
years, the decision of the CWC smacks of desperation and recklessness,
because the timing is all wrong for the following reasons: While the
creation of smaller states made sense 30 years ago, the political
situation in India has changed rather dramatically in recent times
leading to the splintering of the polity and the emergence of dozens of
small, regional parties and unstable coalitions at the Centre. The most
dangerous consequence of these developments is that they have enfeebled
the Centre and made it extremely weak and vulnerable. The best example
of the Centre’s loss of strength is its failure to push through the idea
of an unified National Counter-Terrorism Centre. A nation like India
which is the most diverse society on earth in terms of race, culture,
religion, caste and language and which has 28 states and many Union
Territories, needs a strong Centre to hold it together. This was the
case in the first thirty years of our Republic, but as the Congress
Party became more and more arrogant and opportunistic, regional
politicians encashed on the Congress’ follies, stirred up regional
sentiments and promoted smaller, denominational political entities in
different parts of the country. The result is there for all of us to see
now.
In 1957, the Second Lok Sabha had MPs representing 12 political
parties. Fifty years hence, the Lok Sabha had 42 political parties. The
way things are going, we should be ready for 60 or more political
parties. If the experience of the past 17 years is anything to go by,
the smaller, regional parties in the coalitions that have ruled the
country since 1996 have substantially hindered governance because of
their incapacity to look beyond their spheres of influence. Many of them
have virtually blackmailed successive prime ministers and got away with
gross inefficiency and corruption. All this has substantially weakened
the Union Government and the office of the Prime Minister. Newer
political formations and further splintering of the polity will
certainly be a recipe for disaster.
In the 1950s, the reorganisation of states was primarily on the basis
of language. The process was triggered by Potti Sriramulu, who
undertook a fast unto death to press for creation of a Telugu State.
This was granted soon after his death because of the large scale
violence it triggered across Andhra. Thereafter, the Nehru government
appointed the States Reorganisation Commission headed by Justice Fazal
Ali.
In its report, submitted in 1955, this Commission considered the
demand for Telangana and weighed it against the advantages of one
unified Telugu-speaking state and made the following observations:
The advantages of a larger Andhra State including Telangana are
that it will bring into existence a state of about 32 millions with a
considerable hinterland, with large water and power resources, adequate
mineral wealth and valuable raw materials. This will also solve the
difficult and vexing problem of finding a permanent capital for Andhra,
the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad are very well suited to be
the capital of Vishalandhra. The considerations which have been argued
in favour of a separate Telangana State are, however, not such as may be
lightly brushed aside.
One of the principal causes of opposition of Vishalandhra was the
apprehension felt by the educationally backward people of Telangana that
they may be swamped and exploited by the more advanced people of the
coastal areas because in the Telangana districts outside the city of
Hyderabad, education is woefully backward. After taking all these
factors into consideration, the commission came to the conclusion that
it will be in the interests of Andhra as well as Telangana if Telangana
were to constitute a separate State, which may be known as the Hyderabad
State “with provision for its unification with Andhra after the general
elections likely to be held in or about 1961 if by a two thirds
majority the legislature of the residency Hyderabad State expresses
itself in favor of such unification”.
The Commission said the advantage of this arrangement will be that
while the objective of the unification of the Andhras will neither be
blurred nor impeded during a period of five or six years, the two
governments may have stabilized their administrative machinery and, if
possible, also reviewed their land revenue systems etc., the object in
view being the attainment of uniformity. The intervening period may
incidentally provide an opportunity for allaying apprehensions and
achieving the consensus of opinion necessary for a real union between
the two States. Andhra and Telangana have common interests and we hope
these interests will tend to bring the people closer to each other. “If,
however, our hopes for the development of the environment and
conditions congenial to the unification of the two areas do not
materialise and if public sentiment in Telangana crystallises itself
against the unification of the two states, Telangana will have to
continue as a separate unit”.
In other words, in 1955, the States Reorganisation Commission was
clearly in favour of a separate Telangana State to begin with. If the
two parts of Andhra Pradesh agreed, then unification could take place
after 1961. The Nehru government rejected this recommendation and went
ahead with the formation of a unified Telugu State called Andhra
Pradesh. Thereafter even Prime Minister Indira Gandhi decided not to
tinker with the geography of Andhra Pradesh, although the Telangana
agitation kept simmering throughout the 1970s and 80s. Chief Minister
Kiran Kumar Reddy questioned the wisdom of the present leaders of the
Congress Party when he said “when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira
Gandhi, after careful consideration, felt that the state should remain
united”, the attitude of the present leadership did not make sense.
Many decades later, in February, 2010, the Congress headed by
Ms.Sonia Gandhi prompted the Manmohan Singh Government to constitute yet
another committee to consider the Telangana issue. Even this committee
headed by Justice B.N.Srikrishna did not favour the bifurcation of
Andhra Pradesh. It said :
In view of various considerations indicated earlier, the Committee
is convinced that the development aspect was of utmost importance for
the welfare of all the three regions and could best be addressed through
a model that includes deeper and more extensive economic and political
decentralisation. The Committee believes that overall it may not be
necessary to have a duplication or multiplication of capitals,
assemblies, ministries, courts, institutions and administrative
infrastructure required by the other options. The Committee considers
that unity is in the best interest of all the three regions of the state
as internal partitions would not be conducive to providing sustainable
solutions to the issues at hand. In this option, it is proposed to keep
the state united and provide constitutional/statutory measures to
address the core socio-economic concerns about development of Telangana
region. This can be done through the establishment of a statutory and
empowered Telangana Regional Council with adequate transfer of funds,
functions and functionaries in keeping with the spirit of Gentlemen’s
Agreement of 1956. The Regional Council would provide a legislative
consultative mechanism for the subjects to be dealt with by the Council.
The Srikrishna Committee suggested the following subjects for the
proposed Telangana Regional Council: Planning & Economic
Development, including preparation of development sub-plan for the
region as part of State Plan, Water and Irrigation sector, Education
(primary and secondary); Skill development and vocational education,
Local Administration. Public Health (up to district hospitals excluding
medical colleges and speciality health care).
The Committee said it was suggesting the united Andhra option for
continuing the development momentum of the three regions and keeping in
mind the national perspective. “With firm political and administrative
management it should be possible to convey conviction to the people that
this option would be in the best interest of all and would provide
satisfaction to the maximum number of people in the state. It would also
take care of the uncertainty over the future of Hyderabad as a bustling
educational, industrial and IT hub/destination”.
The Srikrishna Committee was most worried about the consequences of
granting statehood to Telangana. Taking note of the demand for
Gorkhaland, Bodoland, Bundelkhand etc, it said, “the division of the
state will also have serious implications outside Andhra Pradesh. It
would not only give fillip to other similar demands but it will be for
the first time, after the re-organisation of states, that a political
demand for dividing a linguistically constituted state would have been
conceded by the Union Government with the creation of two Telugu
speaking states. The issue requires a most calm and dispassionate
consideration of the consequences”.
As can be seen, Nehru rejected the Justice Fazal Ali Commission
Report in 1955 and Sonia Gandhi rejected the Justice Srikrishna
Committee Report in 2013. On both occasions, the Congress Party has done
what suited it best. The country as a whole will now have to bear the
consequences. If India is to overcome this crisis and survive the
Congress Party’s myopic political decisions, there is need for
statesmanship both at the national and state level. Ideally a group of
eminent Indians from different walks of life must step in to bring back
peace to the two warring regions of Andhra Pradesh and untangle the mess
created by politicians. Will some on take the call?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.