Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What new Telangana state means for India

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What new Telangana state means for India

    What new Telangana state means for India
    30 July 2013

    India's ruling Congress party-led government has announced the formation of a new state of Telangana to be carved out of the southern state of Andhra Pradesh. The creation of Telangana reflects the end of a long journey for those who have campaigned for statehood - and the beginning of a fresh set of wrangles over the shaping of the new state. The movement for Telangana has rolled on for decades with peaks and troughs of popular mobilisation. Electoral alliances have been made and broken in the name of statehood. Short term political calculations by a nervy Congress party ahead of next year's elections have governed Tuesday's announcement more than grander visions about the restructuring of Indian political or economic life.
    Entire article is available at: BBC

    I am hoping that our Indian board members can explain this development and lend us their thoughts.
    sigpic

  • #2
    Interesting you brought this up. I look at it with trepidation, given my state borders this new 'entity'. We've had coal shipments blocked in the past whenever the telangan activist started striking, basically blocking train lines. The elites of Telangana want a piece of the pie and agitated to get it. Congress is in a tricky spot and that they decided to move forward here indicates that they cannot afford to lose the Andhra vote in the general elections to be held next year or possibly sooner.

    My daily said the capital Hyderabad which is in Telangana will have a joint administration. It's hard enough to get one administration to agree let alone adding an extra party into the mix. This means more politicking and slower decisions. Can't be good for the economy of Hyderabad at least in the short term. The Andhra state has been successful and business friendly, what this does is force a reconfiguration and will lead to delays. At the same time they cannot afford to screw the goose that lays the golden eggs.

    And that is where the real effect will be seen, how the economy will deal with this transition. Have always felt the money was not for this move and was against unless their concerns were addressed and have got into some pretty nasty fights with Telangana supporters online about it. Thing that bugged me is i never saw any critical debates about this issue whatsoever. Just the usual it will happen, they need it and advocacy bla bla.

    Out of the three newly formed states (uttarakhand, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh) in the last ten years just one of them (Uttarakhand) managed to do better, the others are stagnant, so whether Telangana will be any better or become a bigger PITA remains to be seen. The problem here is they share the same capital. Instead of having their own like with the other newly formed states.

    Just to think back over ten years back, Naidu was in charge. He was so aggressive he'd have given Modi a good run for the money. Naidu was 100% pro development & capital. What happened in 2003 ? the Andhras kicked him out. Not populist enough
    Last edited by Double Edge; 31 Jul 13,, 11:12.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Minskaya View Post
      I am hoping that our Indian board members can explain this development and lend us their thoughts.
      India has many ethnic and linguistic groups across the region. They speak different languages, dialects and follow a different culture, rituals, food habits etc. They fight each other as much as they get along.

      After the british left india in 1947, independent india found itself trying to manage over 500 regions which proved to be an administrative nightmare. So in the early 50s, the govt hired some experts to merge these regions with one another as much as possible. To merge them meant to find the best commonality shared between these groups. The committee of experts made "Language" as the basis of merger and thus over 500 regions were clubbed together into 19 states.

      Over the years, there have been many protests, agitations and violence from those not happy or satisfied with the merger. The indian govt has listened and obeyed as much as it could, so it created another few states. Till now, the indian union has 36 states in total. If telangana statehood is granted, india will have 37 states.

      There are still 15 or so more regions that demand a separate state. Some of those demands are foolish while others are threats to the state govt to take notice and act before its too late.

      Q: What does the creation of Telangana mean for India?
      A: It means that maharashtra should attend to the needs of vidharba else face the same fate as that of andhra pradesh. Maharashtras "marathi nationalism" might prove as useless as andhras "telugu nationalism".

      It is a warning to all states to put money across the entire length and breath of their state. Currently many of them don't focus past their own capital cities. Vast swaths of land across many states are brazenly neglected by their state governments.
      Last edited by anil; 31 Jul 13,, 14:23.

      Comment


      • #4
        Telangana: Protests over new state in southern India
        31 July 2013

        Protests are being held in the southern Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, a day after the announcement that it will be split to form a new Telangana state. Anti-Telangana protesters have ransacked the ruling Congress party office in Anantapur district and thrown stones at the police. With a population of 35 million, Telangana comprises 10 of Andhra Pradesh's 23 districts including Hyderabad, India's sixth biggest city. Backers of the new state say the area has been neglected by the government. Opponents of the move are unhappy that Hyderabad, home to many major information technology and pharmaceutical companies, will become a shared state capital for 10 years. In the southern and coastal region of the state, businesses and schools are shut and transport disrupted.

        Wednesday's protests come a day after India's ruling Congress-led coalition unanimously agreed to the formation of the new state. The protests have been called by the United Andhra Joint Action Committee which opposes the division of the state. Some local Congress party members have also opposed the split. A total of 13 districts in the coastal and Rayalaseema regions have been affected by the strike, reports the BBC's Omer Farooq in Hyderabad. Twenty-three lawmakers, including six from the Congress party, belonging to the state assembly have resigned in protest against the move, our correspondent says. Businesses, schools and cinemas are closed and public transport has been badly hit, leaving many passengers stranded. The state has seen protests for and against the proposal in recent years.

        Protesters blocked railway lines in Nellore and roads in other districts, as well as staging demonstrations outside the houses of Congress party ministers and politicians. Huge demonstrations have been held in Visakhapatanam, Tirupati and Vijayawada. In the city of Ongole in Prakasham district, protesters also attacked the office of the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for supporting the splitting of Andhra Pradesh. Reports say Ongole could end up being the new capital of Andhra Pradesh. Hundreds of paramilitary troops were deployed after Tuesday's announcement.
        Source: BBC

        It doesn't seem like this will be a smooth and seamless transition.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          It is a stupid last ditch election winning wheeze by a corrupt and desperate Congress Party.
          The decision should never have been made, they should have let it die in committee .
          All across india other state demand factions have now become heartened and emboldened.
          We should be looking at reducing the number of states (i.e troughs for the pigs) rather than increasing them.

          The people of Andhra actually dont care. This was an agitation by regional pols who were not happy being junior pigs at the same trough and wanted a separate trough of their own.
          Now they get a whole new legislature and bureaucracy with which to loot from the hapless people of their new state.
          Just thinking of the money they will skim for setting up a new state capital alone makes me sick to my stomach.
          For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Minskaya View Post
            I am hoping that our Indian board members can explain this development and lend us their thoughts.
            This is parochial politics at its best. I'm sure most of my Indian friends on WAB will agree to it.

            Cheers!...on the rocks!!

            Comment


            • #7
              This is just political. Congress is attempting its last gamut for the 2014 elections. What I don't understand is why the fascination for new states? In Assam, it's just not the Bodos who want their own state, it's the Dimasas and Karbis too. In Manipur, the Kukis want an autonomous district (and probably have their eyes set at demanding a state later). Nagas want Nagalim. This doesn't end.

              In Assam development is nil. Infrastructure sucks. There is next to nil - industrial base. Power cuts range from 4 hours to 13 hours on a daily basis. There is a small village, where electricity poles were washed away by flash floods last year. It still doesn't have power. Another small village, Harangajao has power cuts upto 22 hours daily and the reason given by authorities was that there aren't enough funds to buy a transformer. Fed up, the people collected money and bought a transformer. But what can a transformer do (?), if there is no supply of power. Basically, the demand for new states boil down to corruption. Whatever grants/money comes to Assam from Delhi is divided first in Guwahati. After that, whatever is left is distributed to the districts. So the demand for new states by indigenous people, so that they can have all the money for themselves and nobody to ask for or answer too. Sometimes there are legitimate demands about a part of India being neglected by the Central Govt, but having new states is not the solution. In a democracy, people need to make themselves heard. NE India is not developed not because the Central Government did not do anything, more so because of accountability which is missing in this country (a lot of funds are granted though) and the people themselves who are not vocal enough.
              Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

              Comment


              • #8
                Lot of random thoughts on first glance...

                Looking at the map the new State would be slightly larger then Hungary, with 4x more population.

                What does the Indian Constitution gives to the states? Can they go all the way for independence or it is a big no, no, NO!?

                The Balkan boy in me views this as a good move if the cards are played right. More decentralization, yet enjoying the benefits of being a member of a large union: postal, banking, rail, army, diplomacy...
                No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Already started.

                  Within hours of the Congress Working Committee (CWC) recommending the creation of Telangana State, the Bodo Peoples Front (BPF) formally conveyed to the Centre its decision to revive its old demand for creation of a separate State of Bodoland, threatening to launch an agitation.
                  With the Congress starting the process of creating a separate State of Telangana, different organisations of the Bodoland Territorial Autonomous Districts area (BTAD) have threatened to launch mass movements for creation of separate states and additional security forces have already been rushed to the BTAD area to keep the situation under control.
                  BPF to revive separate state demand: Hagrama

                  Demands for separate states gain momentum

                  NEW DELHI: A day after the announcement of Telangana, towns in coastal Andhra Pradesh and Rayalseema shut down while fireworks lit up the Hyderabad sky in celebrations on Wednesday. But the proposed 29th state also ignited shrill calls for statehood in faraway Darjeeling in West Bengal, among the Karbis and Bodos in Assam and in Uttar Pradesh where former chief minister Mayawati called for implementation of her '4-state' formula.
                  Telangana effect: Stirs hot up in other states
                  Last edited by Oracle; 01 Aug 13,, 06:12. Reason: Added one more source
                  Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                    What does the Indian Constitution gives to the states? Can they go all the way for independence or it is a big no, no, NO!?
                    Secession from the indian union is not an option.

                    There are two kinds of states in the indian union in actuality:
                    1) A full fledged indian state(authority divided between the state and the centre)
                    2) Autonomous administration or something similar to a protectorate where centre interferes in matters of defence, monetary policy etc.

                    As part of the deal(benefit) to remain in the indian union, the states enter into "extra agreements" with new delhi which are later amended into the indian constitution. (for eg, the state of Jammu and Kashmir have a separate constitution and even a separate passport. A kashmiri has dual citizenship - they are a citizen of Kashmir as well as a citizen of India).

                    Constitution of India/Part XXI - Wikisource, the free online library

                    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                    The Balkan boy in me views this as a good move if the cards are played right. More decentralization, yet enjoying the benefits of being a member of a large union: postal, banking, rail, army, diplomacy...
                    The new state(telangana) will be a full fledged state so creating it is not a problem except overcoming regional nationalism. The real challenge for new delhi is when a state claims rights over the territories of other states. eg: belgaum, nagalim or bundelkhand.
                    Last edited by anil; 01 Aug 13,, 10:52.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Whatever, the decision of the ruling party will be based upon vote bank politics. Congress declared when it sensed the threat of loosing votes to rival parties, that actual cause for feasibility in development and progress gets undermined. An extra state is an extra non tariff barrier in free flow of trade and commerce, but if one is inevitable, it should be a provisional status with full grant only if the division yield fruitful results. Maybe the Comptroller and Auditor General of India- office should submit a report on performance before a full-fledged grant after a span of time. If a separated state cant perform better what is the use of granting a statehood?
                      Last edited by payeng; 01 Aug 13,, 14:20.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        @anil,

                        Thanks for the info.

                        @payeng,
                        How would you measure state performance?
                        No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                        To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Doktor, it was just a crazy idea from my side for the fact that state division based on ethnic population in a nation like India would yield numerous states for no valid reason of progress but with the level of corruption the blessing of decentralisation can be a disgrace with more demerits then feasibility, as a consequence of governments green signal for the state of Telangana a lot of other pressure groups are also forwarding their demand and yes definitely not in a peaceful manner, but rather seems like an emotional out burst of frustration for no reason or maybe to fill the pockets of some launders enough for his next seven generation, so why a separate state? if it is corruption then it is definitely not a solution, if it is discrimination it is not an answer, if it is a problem it is not a solution.

                          In the other hand I think creation of a separate state need to be passed in absolute majority in the state legislature and in both the houses of Parliament i.e. the upper house and the lower house , not sure of the kind of majority needed (2/3rd for absolute and simple majority is just more then 50%) followed by signing the bill by the President of India to become an Act.

                          Decentralisation can be good but with a high level of corruption its benefits are discounted.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            It is sad that it takes 50 years, and so much bloodshed with students self-immolating themselves to get the government to heed to the people's demand. It is even sadder that none of those events mattered in the creation of the state, but ugly opportunism where the Congress knows it needs the support from whom-ever it can get it from in the next general elections.

                            It is important to go into the history of the Telugu-Andhra merger in 1956 to understand the reasons behind this divorce. The Telangana areas at the time were largely illiterate and underdeveloped compared to the coastal Andhra regions. The merger was carried out under the Gentlemen's agreement, where the Telugu areas hoped to be uplifted by a merger with the more developed coastal areas in the hope of a more uniform distribution of resources. However, that upliftment never really happened and the Telugu areas remain one of the most backward areas to this day. The Telugu people have started to blame this on the merger, claiming that the administration, mostly dominated by the coastal elites, have only gone on to neglect Telugu areas. So, the demand to separate from coastal Andhra has only grown over the years, and it appears that it has finally come to fruition.

                            For those who are pointing out that the demands of the Gurkhas in Bengal will now have to be accommodated (for a separate state called Gorkhaland); I argue that it is the natural thing to do. They have nothing in common with the Bengalis. Thousands of Gurkhas have died demanding their own statehood representation within India. You can't be called a democracy when thousands of Indians have to die to make their voice heard, and where "referendum" is a non-existent term.

                            I believe that decentralization and a better representation helps in curbing secessionist tendencies by accommodating regional aspirations within India. The Gurkhas and Bodos have already turned to violence once, as they realized that the doors to political accommodation were closed.
                            Last edited by Tronic; 02 Aug 13,, 06:11.
                            Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                            -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by anil View Post
                              India has many ethnic and linguistic groups across the region. They speak different languages, dialects and follow a different culture, rituals, food habits etc. They fight each other as much as they get along.

                              After the british left india in 1947, independent india found itself trying to manage over 500 regions which proved to be an administrative nightmare. So in the early 50s, the govt hired some experts to merge these regions with one another as much as possible. To merge them meant to find the best commonality shared between these groups. The committee of experts made "Language" as the basis of merger and thus over 500 regions were clubbed together into 19 states.

                              Over the years, there have been many protests, agitations and violence from those not happy or satisfied with the merger. The indian govt has listened and obeyed as much as it could, so it created another few states. Till now, the indian union has 36 states in total. If telangana statehood is granted, india will have 37 states.

                              There are actually 28 Indian states, not 36! I believe you are counting union territories (UT), which are way too small to be counted as states; largely being cities such as Chandigarh (became UT after de-merger of Punjab and Haryana) and Delhi, or small islands and enclaves absorbed or annexed from the French and the Portuguese.

                              Also, to expand on the state's re-organization post-independence. The British governed India by dividing it into 17 provinces. India more or less inherited the same administrative divisions until the '56 re-organization of the states. The re-organization was done to mainly re-organize the unnatural British-era Provinces and the former-Princely states, many of whom were merged with their neighbours. For example, Punjab and Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU), were both ethnically similar, Punjabi speaking states, but the former was ruled directly by the British, while PEPSU was a state composed of the combination of 8 Punjabi princely states who still held much clout after independence. Abolishing PEPSU and merging it with Punjab, (and other former-Princely states such as merging Ajmer with Rajasthan, Kutch and Saurashtra with Bombay, etc) was the first step to erode that clout from the Royals. Abolishing all royal titles in 1971 was the second step at eroding the status of the royal families and better integrating them into India. The lingual organization was never fully carried out in 1956, because Nehru was actually opposed to decentralization in practice.
                              Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                              -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X