Friday, December 11, 2009

Telangana : Why all is this Fuss about Pandora Box ??

Concept of Indian Subcontinent ( Erstwhile India inclusive of India-Pakistan-Bangladesh ) has always perplexed me to the core. When few states in west and east separated out , How rest of India managed to survive initial years of heterogeneous characteristic? Linguistically and culturally India is far more diverse than whole Europe. Fragmentation of India in to 20-30 small countries would never have been a distinct probability, had States Reorganization Commission not been appointed by Jawaharlal Nehru. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 drew new lines and internal map of India changed giving respect to all major languages and cultures of India thus appeased most of the India`s population. Since then almost a dozen new demands have come up for new states based on linguistic, cultural, economic or even political distinctness. Out of them , Maharashtra, Haryana, Chattisgarh, Uttaranchal, Himachal Pradesh, few others in North East managed to establish their own governance.....Then why all is this fuss about Telangana now? Some argue that it gonna open a chain for many other such demands ? Didn't it happen in 2000 when 3 new states were formed in BJP government? And if some parts of a state do want their own governance, Isn't that synchronous with democracy applied for that region?
Ok Lets get into some rhetorical argument -
1. People from a region always like to have their say in policies which effect them. Recent furor over sugarcane prices let to massive protest from farmers of West UP. Mayavati government was complete oblivious of the pain of west UP and Central government was not ready to agree to their demands. With no where to go , onus was on finances of western UP. Of course why would someone living in a village near Allahabad be sympathetic to farmer of Muzaffarnagar`s village? Similar people sharing similar profession and needs should have of their own represented government understanding their needs.
2. What bonding can someone living in Meerut/Agra and someone from Ghorakhpur share? When there is difference in identity , culture and language the concept of that state becomes invalid. Haryana carved out of Punjab for much lesser reasons. Why not harit Pradesh?
3. UP is the sixth largest state in the world by population. People have to travel upto 700 kilometers to just reach the state secretariat. Eventually development and management becomes tough in such cases. Even if state government become serious for welfare and development of people and state, administration of such a large state becomes tough . Smaller states are always easier to manage . Even if UP is divided in 3 states, they will still be more or less the size of Haryana and bigger than Kerala .

Looking ahead , I envisage demands for Vidharbha(out Of Maharashtra ), Bundelkhand (Out of UP and MP ) , Gorkhaland (from West Bengal) , Harit Pradesh ( from Uttar Pradesh ) as few that need urgent attention for statehood consideration .

Coming to Telengana - Hyderabad- Andra problem. On facts, Hyderabad is product of efforts of whole Andra Pradesh. Two cities that should better be converted into union territory are Bombay and Hyderabad, albeit for different reasons. Bombay needs special status to be looked after its degrading condition(will discuss later someday). Hyderabad region can serve as UT capital of both Coastal Andra and Telengana. In addition, both states can develop a sub capital for individual administrative needs. This will bring more cities into development picture. Big cities under independent/non-political control is never a bad idea if we want to decentralize development in a state to many cities .(Different discussion - Will be continued ....)

P.s. I really disturbed with names we have for our states .Names like UP, MP, Bihar make me feel as if they lack historical Identity. Names like Awadh, Magadh, Oudh will reflect better picture of past in future


Anonymous said...

you are right, but how you can make here some people do not want to make Harit Pardesh.

Then how we can make it.

Arpan Uber Chaudhry said...

Avinash Kumar Agrawal

as i see it patriotism is at downfall and regionalism at rise. And therefore union territories are not solution. After telangana there are talks of vidarbha and others

Fri at 18:53 · Delete

Chaudhry Arpan

Nothing bad in it.. Why are we scared of division of states? looking after regional needs is too big a component of Indian existence to Ignore

Fri at 18:57 · Delete

Avinash Kumar Agrawal

well I belong to chattisgarh a divided state and i can tell you tat a smaller state means more corruption and power playing, in smaller states everyone knows politicians . U.S. has such big states but they are good because of vigilance which keeps a check on corruption. Certain parts of our states dont get return on their resources due to corruption(or influential politicians not from their constituencies) so division is not a solution but keeping a check on corruption is.

Fri at 19:54 · Delete

Chaudhry Arpan

Dunno how relevant it was for your state .. But was chattisgarh any better under MP..Corruption can be in small or even bigger states .. but least two things are different
1. In smaller states if someone wants to work for people .Its more efficient
2. Its easy to trace corruption .. At ;east you know who are responsible for chattisgarh ..
US cant be compared to India.. Its a homogeneous country with same culture .. India is much more diverse than US

Fri at 20:28 · Delete

Arpan Uber Chaudhry said...

Aakanksha Ahsknakaa

yeah.. India is as divided as its diverse!! I don't knw much bout d telangana issue, but since ppl r fightin for it before independence, must be a good reason!!!

As for mumbai, its full of corruption. ON YOUR FACE. and ppl ignore it!!!

I do agree with Arpans point of more efficiency in smaller states, but then, we cant keep on diving all states . There has to be one intermediate solution.

Fri at 22:04 · Delete

Chaudhry Arpan

Well said.. I am also against random division .. But I would like government to have a serious look at economic ,political and social positives if any division of state can bring ..Then only they can proceed ahead... We living in cities and working in MNC can never understand demand and problems of Lakhs of farmers in pathetic condition in ... See MoreVidharbha ..They feel neglected from this high growing Indian Economy or Maharashra Economy..Similarly UP is too big a state(six largest country as world population) to be managed and even UP CM admitted that in press today
Mumbai can emerge as model city if it is separated from Maharshtra and away from clutches of MNS , SS (with due protection for local people`s aspirations ) and funds coming to mumbai can be directly monitored.Personally , I would like o see Bombay again.. Once a dream of every Indian to come ...

Sat at 01:10 · Delete

Chaudhry Arpan

In 1947, strong centre was needed because we were a young country. 60 years later, idea of India strong enough for 30/40 states.

Here , Rest of maharashtra with capital pune will be an effective state, mumbai Thane will be an economic hub for the region.
Vidharbha with Nagpur as capital

Sat at 01:36 · Delete

Akanksha Singh Bhadouria

for me mroe states means betr adminstration and use of resources...

Sat at 11:03 · Delete

Akanksha Singh Bhadouria

for me mroe states means betr adminstration and betr use of resources...

Sat at 11:05 · Delete

Arpan Uber Chaudhry said...

First rate piece by bibek debroy on why we need smaller states, 45 instead of 28!

Anon Emus said...

Well said sir.......
After all this I demand a statehood for my house....