If a new state is to be formed, the most democratic means would be for a resolution to be moved in the Andhra Pradesh Assembly giving effect to the move
If a new state is to be formed, the most democratic means would be for a resolution to be moved in the Andhra Pradesh Assembly giving effect to the move
The pro-Telangana march in Hyderabad on Sunday has once again underlined two aspects of the complex issue. The sentiment for a separate state with Hyderabad as its capital remains vigorous at the popular level, particularly among those living in the city of the nizams.
At the same time, though, the articulation of the demand at the level of political parties and platforms remains confined to a relatively small group that appears to suffer from sharp interpersonal differences.
When the Centre in December 2009 spoke of initiating processes for the formation of a new Telangana state, it was widely taken to mean that the Government of India was preparing to hand over the keys of a new state to constituencies that had demanded Telangana from time to time. Looking back, this reading appears misplaced. Essentially what the Congress Party — as evidenced by the December 9 statement in Parliament by then Union home minister P. Chidambaram — was doing was reviving the spirit of its 2004 accord with TRS leader K. Chandrasekhar Rao, namely that stepped-up consultations would be held with all political constituencies with a view to reaching a consensus on the vexed issue. The operative word here is “consensus”. This can only materialise through brainstorming, not by crowd action.
If consensus has been elusive, it is precisely due to the complexity of the issue. Representatives of a political party in the Telangana area took a different view from their colleagues in coastal Andhra and Rayalseema. This was true of parties whose reach is spread across the entire state of Andhra Pradesh. Parties like the BJP and CPI, whose legislative representation is confined to the Telangana region, did not face this dilemma. However, interestingly, the Majils-e-Muttahida Muslimeen, whose political spread lies in Telangana, does not favour the division of Andhra Pradesh. This cannot but be seen as a complicating factor.
Most leading cities can be brought to a halt by agitators of any persuasion. So that alone cannot be a guide to deliberative action with long-term policy implications where many interests must be balanced, though localised popular sentiment can’t but be a factor to consider. In the end there can be no substitute for people putting their heads together. The key question is not a rush of blood, but development imperatives of a large area and millions of our citizens.
If a new state is to be formed, the most democratic means would be for a resolution to be moved in the Andhra Pradesh Assembly giving effect to the move. Those who are good at agitating on the streets might do well to seek to persuade parties in the Assembly to see their point of view, using peaceful means.
