For the last few months, there has been hectic activity (including violence!) on the streets of Delhi as well as Hyderabad and many other cities of Andhra Pradesh. The issue at hand is whether the Telangana 'region' of AP should be made a separate state. Furious arguments are being raised on either side of the divide. In the end, as is the case with most things in India, it all ends up being about politics. Surprisingly however, most intellectuals in this case are found arguing against the creation of a separate state. Their main arguments can be summarized as follows:
1. Creation of a new state might lead to similar demands elsewhere and lead to 'Balkanization' of India.
2. Telangana is a land-locked and economically unviable state.
3. Hyderabad's economy will suffer if it goes to such a state.
4. Unnecessary paperwork and overhead will be involved in creating and maintaining a new state.
5. It divides the Telugu speaking people and areas.
However, having assessed the arguments of the Anti-Telangana forces, it seems to me that the main reason is only the last - that this divides the Telugu speaking regions. It goes against the 'linguistic states' philosophy that India followed originally. I for one, believe that a separate Telangana state MUST be carved out of AP! Here's why:
1. The fact of the matter is that the overwhelming majority of people from the Telangana region want a separate state. This has been the case for a few decades now, and has been reflected in the democratic choices those people have made. With this being the genuine wish of the majority, democratic ethos requires that their wish be respected within the constitution of India and it is only fair to grant them statehood. This applies to many other 'genuine burning demands of the people' elsewhere, especially Vidarbha in Maharashtra, Gorkhaland in West Bengal and Jammu and Ladakh in J&K. This is NOT 'Balkanization' of India as some argue, since, the people of Telangana are patriotic Indians in the end. They are not demanding a separate nationhood! What happened in the Balkans is a totally different story, where a nation broke down into multiple nations. Here, it will simply be a story of a nation federating itself further for the good.
2. By carving out a separate state out from a 'single language' state, the fundamental basis for 'linguistic chauvinism/regionalism' will be defeated, and this will send out a strong signal to every other 'linguistic' state. Linguistic chauvinism has always been one of India's banes, and this act could very well be a ground-breaking precedent to defeating that evil. We have seen a similar situation before in the sub-continent. Pakistan was carved out of India, arguing that different religions means different nations. But, by helping to carve out a Bengali-speaking Bangladesh out of it, India defeated the idea of religious nationalism. This applies not just to AP, but also Marathi-speaking Maharashtra.
3. India has created several so-called 'unviable' states before - the north-eastern states, for example. The problem is not the economic unviability as of the present, it is whether it is possible to make it viable in the future. Given Telangana's cultural and tourist potential, mineral wealth, etc, it is fairly clear that a viable state economy is possible. So this argument doesn't hold much water.
4. Reg the administrative overhead, one more state is no big deal for India. The United States, for example, has 50 states even though their population is only one-third of India's! The European Union is also similar. The Russian Federation is also a nice example of a large (the largest!) country being managed through multiple autonomous units. Anyways, AP as of now is too large for any government to run effectively. By 'shedding-off' Telangana, the new AP (coast + Rayalseema) can be a better administered state!
5. As far as Hyderabad is concerned, I agree it would be too expensive a loss economically for AP. Hence, I think it might be better to make it a Union Territory, and the shared capital of AP and the new Telangana, much like how Chandigarh is shared by Punjab and Haryana. The 'economic spoils' of Hyderabad can be shared by the two states. But this is easier said than done. Hyderabad is essentially 'surrounded' by Telangana (Rangareddy, Mahbubnagar and Nalgonda districts), and it will be tricky to implement such a solution.
6. Some people argue from a sentimental perspective about the 'unity of Telugu-speaking people'. But Telangana would only be made a separate state, not a separate country! And as per India's constitution, all states are equal and every Indian has a right to work/settle in any state. So this is no big deal either. Things are far worse for various other people elsewhere in the world. E.g, the Kurdish people are split between Iraq, Turkey and Iran, and don't have a unified nation to call their own!
Overall, I think India has too many 'elephantine' states, which are run very inefficiently. It might be wiser to split them up into smaller, more manageable, but viable states. But, this should be the case only where there is a real demand, and/or where it makes sense. E.g, UP continues to be a 'black-hole' state of India, and should seriously be split into two or three smaller states. Maharashtra, on the other hand, is a peculiar case. Even though it is India's richest state, the fact that statehood sentiments exist in Vidarbha only shows that the state government seems to have focused too much on Mumbai, Pune and the coast.
Hence, overall, I feel it is only wise to carve out a separate state of Telangana out of AP. But then again, as with most things in India, the decision ultimately is driven by political considerations, not logical/practical ones, even though a reputed former judge has been appointed to look into it!
23 comments:
Hey .. arun your opinion seems to be based on extremely superficial observations. Tourism is not and industry on which a state can thrive on. When you say a majority of people from telangana want a separate state I presume its only based on what you see in the media. People are gullible and are quick to fall for identity politics. If governments take ill-informed decisions due to pressure politics it will only come back to haunt them. Besides it will open numerous river water disputes. As of now there are river disputes between all the southern states. Forget irrigation water, some states might be even deprived of drinking water. As you might know chennai thrives on telugu ganga .. the krishna water sent from AP, after changing its natural course. Besides this, its also a very ill-informed opinion that telangana is in any way backward. Growth rates of all but a couple of districts in telangana are much higher than the average growth rate of AP. So this statehood is in no way a solution to peoples problems. If some guy is jobless and he is told that getting a separate state can get you a government job he would be very susceptible to these identity politics, even if in the first place such promises are baseless. This is all thats happening in student agitations. So please do get rid of your ill-informed opinion and give us a break! If possible remove this post!
hey venky, thanks for your comment! :-)
let me come to the points you have raised.
reg tourism - i disagree tourism cannot be a driving industry for an economy. there are examples from within and outside india, e.g, goa, cambodia and the newest country in the world - montenegro. the question is, can the state bring this industry to that level, but that is a problem for later on.
reg media - i am not basing my conclusion on 'media hype' (i dont even see telugu channels :D), i am going by genuine official reports and democratic choices of the people - in the state and national elections. in fact, when the states reorganization committee was deliberating on creating the new state of AP, to be carved out of erstwhile state of Madras, on the basis of language, they had serious doubts over whether the Telangana region, from the erstwhile princely state of Hyderabad, should be merged with it. you can read the report for yourself. following that, the popular demand in the telangana region for demerger from AP has been strong. we have seen such demands in jharkhand and uttarakhand as well. they were granted statehood. it is only fair that telangana get statehood too.
reg pressure politics - i disagree. democracy is meant to serve the people's wishes. a government that fails to do so will eventually fall. by trying to hold the people of telangana against their wish, the AP government is doing the same mistake that the former governments of UP and Bihar did. like i said, it might very well be a better future for the new AP with Telangana gone.
reg river disputes - yes i agree it might cause new problems. but i think rivers should be moved to the central list, and the supreme court's verdict is final in all cases. but the solution to that is orthogonal to this.
in the end, it is not about some guy leading agitations (by students or whoever else) or some political party interested in power. i think it is a real demand of the people, and i have listed several reasons why i think that demand is reasonable.
finally, my opinion is based on studied, rational and scientific assessments. i did not go by 'populist', 'sentimental' or 'ill-informed' information/opinion. :-)
I want to comment, but this is too sensitive an issue for people to write without knowing the underlying facts. Besides, I am drained.
All, I wanna say is that I am so so happy that you have chosen Academia as your career...
I can't even imagine you are arguing a much general case based on extremely hyperbolic examples. One cannot compare small beachfront states like goa and predominantly agrarian cambodia(barring the Angkor region) to telangana region. And common, Cambodia and Montenegro are countries dude! Unfortunately Telangana is not a Kerala or Goa as you seem to suggest. But increased investment in tourism is of course a case for improvement even in the current set up as a single state.
Reg your claim of going by democracy, there are several serious questions .. None of the so called agitators even asked for telangana, not even a single protest, demonstration or anything like that for a significant period of time until the erstwhile CM YSR passed away. The TRS party did not even win a significant number of seats in the elections. These people who were desperate for political survival have come up with all this nonsense. Your judgemental statements in this reply are unarguable for they lack any appreciable premise. We are not doing any fairness based allocation here. So your argument that 'Jarkhand was carved out,so let this happen too' is pathetic because Bihar is such an undeveloped state contrary to what AP is. I regret to reiterate but we need to do what is apt not what seems populist!
Your proposed solution to river disputes is in no way going to help the ever straining relations between states. SC cannot play the role of an all controlling master for long if some people are devoid of their basic necessities. I wouldn't be surprised if these very important problems motivate demands akin to balkanisation due to extreme non-cooperation. Since we are such a diverse country we should be aware of it and create an atmosphere for peaceful unstrained coexistence. And I am sure chennai will not have water to drink :) .. not a drop if telangana comes. I am only curious that TN will be in the worst position ever with Kaveri water already running into problems.
Unfortunately since you are not a close(local) party to this issue you are not aware of many factors that I cannot bring to the table due to their sheer number. So do not be judgmental in assuming that you have sufficient information to argue the case.
I hope you have changed your opinion :)
dude, you still didnt get my point. it is no big deal if cambodia/montenegro are countries, they are much smaller/similar sized as telangana :-) there are umpteen other examples in the world. but again, these are issues for the future, which are orthogonal to the question of statehood for telangana since im reasonably sure that telangana can be made a viable economy based on tourism, agriculture, and mineral wealth (coal, limestone, etc), not to mention IT if hyderabad is to be shared. :-)
secondly, you still dont get the fundamental point of democracy. im afraid you are the one going by what you see in the media now, incl this arbit trs party, protests, etc. there is a much deeper problem of genuine discontent in telangana and it is as old as the state of AP itself! please read the stream of reports from the govt and other parties (starting from the SRC in the 1950s).
please dont go by just the present; the past (and the future) should be taken into account. again, like i said, a new state of AP (sans telangana) might very well be better a manageable state than it is now, with its unresolvable rampant problems of naxal violence, farmer suicides, etc (please dont be offended and think im ridiculing AP or something! im just pointing out the reality!)
thirdly, it seems to me that being a 'close' party to the situation at hand (as you put it :-), you are largely driven by emotional/sentimental factors, rather than logical/scientific ones by someone like me ('an outsider') who has viewed the situation objectively and without biases and prejudices, and come to a conclusion.
as such, you did not have any valid counter to my points 4 and 2, as well as a concluding point i made. i think AP, Maha, UP, and some others are large, inefficiently managed states. it only makes sense to divide them into smaller, more efficiently manageable units.
and dude, dont bring trivial considerations like chennai not getting telugu ganga water into the picture here. there are several other (orthogonal) solutions to that problem, like the veeranam water scheme, rain-water harvesting, etc. and dont think i would be carried away by TN-related issues, which are very remotely related to telangana. :-) i prefer looking at things from an objective and neutral standpoint. :-) e.g, if tomorrow, there is a 'genuine widespread popular demand' from, say, the southern districts of TN for a separate state (and if these criteria that i raised are satisfied), i would not mind supporting that demand either! but the fact of the matter is that currently, TN is by-and-large efficiently administered and there are no major 'separate state' sentiments in any part of TN (btw, TN is also a very peculiar state of india, due the 'dravidian movement'. that so called 'revolution' has helped maintain 'tamil unity' and it will be very difficult to break. no wonder congress/bjp are struggling against dmk/aiadmk! :-)) the case is certainly different with Maha and UP though. :-)
again, please dont go by sentiments. a state should be seen as an abstraction for political convenience. the nation, viz 'india' is what one's 'emotions' should be attached to. also, unfortunately in india, various irrational things are mixed up with what is practical/logical. let us wait and see what justice srikrishna comes up with. in fact, you know what, you have given me an idea. i think i will email him these arguments of mine, so that he can take these into account as well in coming up with his recommendation :-)
@the unreasonable man, i don't think i know you (?) but nevertheless, thanks for your 'non-comment' :-D i dont see why you should be afraid to comment on 'sensitive issues'. freedom of speech and expression is a human right, and you can do so, without leading to division/hatred of course. as you can see, my position on this issue is based on logical/rational/scientific assessments of the situation at hand, and not an inflammatory sentimental position. :-)
wrt career, how did you come to the conclusion that i have 'chosen academia'? for all you know, later on, i might join indian politics! :D indian politics really needs voices of reason, and people like dr. manmohan singh, shashi tharoor, etc have shown the way for the educated intelligentsia to join mainstream politics :-)
@venky, one more point. a general principle in diplomacy is to resolve a long-standing unresolvable dispute between two opposing parties through a neutral external mediator.
and, by not being a 'local party' to the pro vs anti telangana issue (in which i can clearly see that you belong to the latter camp), you should remember that an opinion by someone like me ('an interested outside party') is of value (no matter however little) to a mediator like justice srikrishna :D
@venky, on a personal note, a thing about me (which you would know i guess :-)) is that is rarely come to a thought-out and principled opinion/stance on an issue. in my opinion, this article is one such piece (you can disagree; you have a right to :-)). and once i come to such an opinion, it is extremely difficult to convince me to change my mind, unless some extremely strong rational/logical/meaningful point is brought to my attention, which rarely happens however. a previous example of such a case is my stance on religion - you can check my previous post 'Deus Caritas Est', the numerous comments therein, and my replies thereof. :-)
Arun,
Nice post dude. Just push your blog to SKC also as your petition. Do enable the "Follow" widget for others to follow your blog posts. I am compiling my petition to SKC at my blog, http://theopenterrace.blogspot.com/p/telangana.html Take time to visit and post your valueble suggestions.
@nagaraj, thanks for your comment (sorry i don't think i know you either!)
no, i am not going to do all that; i am not a political activist you see! as of now, my positions are at an academic level. i will send my opinion to the SKC at my own pace and i am not interested in convincing other people to agree to my opinion; what i am interested in is discussions to learn new stuff and deliberations to see if people can get me to change my opinion :-)
also, in the end, it doesnt really matter to me which solution is implemented - separate telangana or unified AP (since i am neither a 'telanganite' nor a 'non-telangana andhraite' you see!) but yes, that doesn't belie the fact that it is my opinion that telangana should get statehood. in that sense, you can call me an 'academic hypocrite' if you will, i will take that as a compliment! :-)
arun, even I feel you didn't get my point and your citation of unity achieved through dravidian movement is extremely misplaced as it had its basis on debunking Aryans and Rama while gloriying Ravana, such movements might have created a sense of unity amongst Tamilians but ofcourse alienated them from the North for a long time to go. Such a notion of self repsect or crave for identity is not a problem here. The bigger issue is to avoid people from building more and more barriers amongst themselves by such 'get your identity movements'. I understand that you are inclined to have your opinion which might be wrong according to me :)...
@venky, dude, i didnt even raise 'identity questions' in my post, you are the one who brought it in :P you are mixing up two distinct things"
Q1. is there genuine unresolved public demand in telangana for a separate state?
Q2. if the answer to Q1 is yes, why is there such a demand?
in my post, i have taken the answer to Q1 to be 'yes', based on numerous govt reports/findings and democratic choices of the people. that is all i needed for framing my opinion. i am not interested in the answer to Q2, which might be 'identity politics', 'economic discrimination', etc, and which also involves a heavy dose of andhra politics, which im not interested in! plus it has been so many decades since the state of AP was formed, and this question has still not been resolved yet! so i think it is now time to act, and act decisively. ;-)
secondly, the main driving force for the so called 'dravidian revolution' in TN was NOT the aryan question. it was simply the imposition of a 'alien' language (hindi) on the tamil people. so, in the end it was all about linguistic chauvinism. the aryan question (originally framed by periyar) was superimposed onto it later on to give the movement further impetus.
thirdly, you still dont have an answer to my points 4 and 2 and a concluding point. from an efficiency perspective, it is imperative to break up large inefficiently-administered states. AP, whether you like it or not, happens to be one of them. also, as you can see, i am partial to the concept of indian nationalism over state/language inspired regionalism.
in fact, your argument of 'identity' feelings in telangana can be extended to defeat your position as well - you are arguing for the 'unity of telugu-speaking lands', which is again based on the 'telugu identity'. i am arguing from an objective and scientific standpoint :-) then again, creating a new state is not exactly like an impenetrable barrier. if it were so, why did india reorganize the states in the first place?! why not have a single monolithic 'state' :D again, under the 'unitary-biased' indian constitution, every indian state is an equal home for an indian citizen, unlike say the case of the US :-)
also, in the end, i really want to see linguistic chauvinism being diminished in the indian psyche! so for a 'seemingly cheap' (:D) reason, i am eager to see a 'single-language' state like AP (or even Maha, esp given the violent marathi-chauvinistic nature of some politicians there) being broken up, much like how a 'single-religion' pakistan was broken up for the good :D (but such a basis doesnt exist in gujarat, TN, etc) of course, you can differ in your opinion for your own reasons but it doesnt seem convincing enough to me :-)
Excellent article, and nice discussions. I think Venky has some very valid points and it would be nice to put out an essay contrasting both points. It's a difficult debate definitely and one is not quite sure whether to weight Venky's words more because he is from AP and therefore has some cultural knowledge and vested interests, or weight your points more for precisely the same reasons. :-)
PS: I didn't quite get the S = { ... } comment on FB, and felt obliged to inquire since my name had come up in that.
@ananth, thanks for your complimentary comment :-)
ya, as you might know, i love lengthy, dignified, academic level discussions! that set S is the set of people whom i have managed to get pissed off/incited enough to drag them to such a discussion (remember the 'M word'? :D) venky is the latest addition to that set!
wrt opinions, yes the fact that venky is from AP, i think, predisposes him to a certain frame of thinking. but keep in mind that another person, from telangana, which is also AP as of now (!), might have a diametrically opposite view to his. i happen to be a neutral, dispassionate and objective outside observer, and i have arrived at this opinion/conclusion based on rational/logical/scientific assessments, not sentimental/political/vested interests :-)
@ ananth .. hi, what vested interests can 'I' have da ? :)
@ arun .. as I said, S can have several meanings AK .. set of all people who think AK is unduly stubborn with his opinion is a minimal interpretation for the time being :)
Perhaps the words "vested interests" is misleading. All I meant is that you are more "attached" to whether Telangana is given statehood or not than Arun will ever be.
Arrgh, this reads really badly. Today's not one of my better days for writing. :-/
I wish I had the right words to express my point :-)
@Arun: The set S should be a little more specific. And you seem to derive some sort of joy proportionate to |S|. I don't think that's necessarily healthy is it?
@Arun: Oops, I almost forgot: Reg. this comment
... on a personal note, a thing about me (which you would know i guess :-)) is that is rarely come to a thought-out and principled opinion/stance on an issue. in my opinion, this article is one such piece (you can disagree; you have a right to :-)). and once i come to such an opinion, it is extremely difficult to convince me to change my mind, unless some extremely strong rational/logical/meaningful point is brought to my attention, which rarely happens however. ...
Forgive me, but this comes of as highly condescending. You seem to imply that others debating you have not thought through their points. And the fact that your opinion must be strong simply because it has been "well thought through" is fallacious because you are the one deciding whether or not it was adequately researched upon. Kind of a circular argument, if you think about it. And the last line just doesn't alleviate the condescension in the post!
Just my $0.02.
తెలంగాణ శత్రువులు ఊహకందనంత బలవంతులు
@venky, hehe, ya i usually dont immediately change an opinion/conclusion that i arrive at after much thought and analysis (like in this case, or the deus caritas est post; call it stubborn if you want!). and i dont usually change it based on just 'another opinion' that someone else proposes. it has be a 'water-tight' argument that is logically/rationally/scientifically sound. it is not as if it hasnt happened before :P the 'iitm prof' entry in S is there because the prof convinced me to alter my earlier 'prof pj' post. i am always open minded you see :P
@ananth, haha, ya bad day for you indeed :-) but hey, it is always fun to get new people to discuss with, rather than with the same old people. so, in that sense, increasing |S| is indeed a nice thing :-)
wrt that para you pointed out, i apologize if you found it condescending. but i was only stating my nature :P i never stated that the countering party would not have thought it through as much as me. in this instance, i am pretty sure venky thought it through very well and has what he fervently believes to be the 'right stance'. however, it was not sufficient for me to change my opinion :-) that is all i meant. btw, i have pointed an example above where the change indeed did happen! plus, many times, like you are aware of i pose a position that doesnt actually reflect my true opinion (e.g. the 'M word' :D), but nevertheless gets the discussion going! in a few cases (like this one, and deus caritas est) it does indeed reflect my opinion. :-)
@Arun: Fair enough. I didn't say you thought others didn't think through their arguments, just that it felt so (not necessarily w.r.t. Venky). But all said and done, these kinds of meta-discussions
go nowhere, so I'll take my leave now :-) Looking forward to future |S| increasing posts :-)
@ananth, hehe, ya all you posted were meta comments :-) you steered clear of commenting on the subject of the post itself :P
could someone please translate that telugu comment (incl the author name!)? :-|
@ananth ..ya it certainly is a meta-discussion .. had a good time though :)
looks like many other comments are in store .. I too leave it here guys .. back to work :-)
Post a Comment