It has been 10 years since Andhra Pradesh was divided into two states. A decade is a long enough time to examine the political, economic and historical implications of the political geography of the Telugu people, for them as well as for the Republic of India.
Little nostalgia
The vitriol that dominated the bifurcation discourse for almost half a decade before the actual bifurcation has now disappeared without a trace. The two successor states, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, continued to make progress. Today’s Telugu people on both sides of the political divide are constantly nostalgic for almost five and a half decades of living together in one political entity. For people from the shrinking parts of Andhra Pradesh, only the Hyderabad of the new state of Telangana remains in their imaginations. The rest of the geography of Telangana is hardly in the consciousness. And, for the people of Telangana, there is no region or aspect of life from the Andhra Pradesh side of the divide that creates a political, social, cultural, or economic imagination.
This is a puzzle for two reasons. These two regions were under different political rulers for only about 150 years. Before the Nizam gave the coastal district and the ‘ceded’ districts which were then called Rayalaseema to the European powers, historically, they were controlled from Golconda and Hyderabad for a long time. And, they were together again since 1956.
However, the long years of living under one political authority did not create enough of a sense of togetherness to prevent them from continuing their separate journeys. Such separation has not happened with the Kannada-speaking areas of the Nizam’s Hyderabad State, nor has it happened with the Marathi-speaking areas. Both joined Karnataka and Maharashtra States, after the linguistic reorganization of the state.
The question arises, therefore, whether the shared vision of the Telugu elites of the two regions – Madras Presidency and Hyderabad State – for unity on the basis of language is frailer compared to the shared vision of the Kannada and Marathi elites. Or, is the same fate waiting for him in the not too distant future? Because, regional economic differences, linguistic differences, lifestyle differences, and political cultural variations are more or less the same in all three linguistic groups in the geography of the Presidency and Hyderabad State.
Until now, only the unity of the Telugus was based on a language that no longer existed. Will other linguistic States meet the same fate in the coming years or decades? What is the fate of Andhra Pradesh which has pioneered the reconfiguration of the political architecture of the Republic of India on linguistic lines as well as predicting the end? Should the Republic of India finally find an organizing principle other than language? This is the larger question posed by the division of Andhra Pradesh in the Republic of India.
It is often not fully appreciated, except for a few States in the geographical center of our Republic, all other states (from Assam in the east, across the east coast in the south-east and continuing to the west coast and up to Punjab and Haryana. in the north-west) Our republic is organized on a linguistic basis. If the principle of language regulation cannot be assembled as a unit, giving greater power to economic, political, historical and other fault lines, alternative principles must be formulated sooner rather than later. Could it be the size of the area or the population? Or, should it be something else? If the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh suggests anything, it is that the Republic of India cannot avoid this question for long.
Size, when translated into the number of seats in the central legislature, may be a point of friction between our Republican units, since representation in numerical form determines the distribution of political power. And, the distribution of political power has the potential to have an impact that determines the distribution of economic resources in the federal structure. There has been an uneasy voice among the political elites in some States, especially in the south, about the speculation about the future delimitation, where some northern States could get an abnormal number in the central legislature.
Where the State stands
Bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh can give us some idea of ​​how the reconfiguration can radically change the pecking order of the state. In the United States, for example, Andhra Pradesh has 42 Lok Sabha seats and is the largest state in southern India. It was as big as present day West Bengal and smaller than Maharashtra. It can bring a significant impact on the national political equation. But now, with just 25 seats, it is smaller than Tamil Nadu with 39 seats and Karnataka with 28 seats, effectively third in the pecking order. Telangana, with 17 seats, is smaller than Kerala, making it fifth in the pecking order in the south. Part of the largest country in the south is now third and another part is fifth in the regional pecking order in terms of political influence. In our federal structure, numbers matter more than you might imagine.
If some States become smaller while others remain large, the political equation between them will become unequal and may cause an undesirable strain on the federal structure of our Republic. The unequal size between these units can make some regions irrelevant and others more relevant in deciding who holds power at the Center. Any perception that the existing regime serves the political and economic interests of some States because its political base is associated with an unequal distribution of power can lead to discontent, dissent and alienation of the country from the mainstream of our Republic.
Cracks will appear
The questions raised by Andhra Pradesh and the lessons offered by the process of division cannot be dismissed or ignored. It is not wise to take comfort from the fact that the two parties have not clearly articulated and follow up on their grievances about the messy way the bifurcation process was handled. The political expression of these grievances from both sides of the division may be delayed but ultimately inevitable. The Telangana elites are still in a euphoric mood of winning the battle for a separate State and are eager to present a brighter side of the aftermath of the victory. Hyderabad is glittering and the generated revenue boom hides the chinks in the road of development. Elites, therefore, are under no pressure to focus on the problems arising from division. Once the euphoria wears off, an understanding of the elimination and commission of a poorly handled division and its political and economic implications will begin.
The Andhra Pradesh side, in the first five years after division, got stuck in its efforts to build for itself a world-class capital to prove the world with a vengeance. which will overcome the loss of Hyderabad. And the next five years are consumed by direct benefit transfer (DBT) welfare. The alternation between these two focuses will eventually bring more serious problems to the surface that can be traced to the ham-handed division of the State. The fact that these two obsessions make the country financially anemic has now been warned. But it can not stay under wraps for a long time. The Centre’s unfulfilled promises on special category status and financial assistance for capital building, inability to implement proper joint asset sharing and other core issues will not escape the attention of the political elite.
The idea of ​​linguistic reorganization of India had a long period of incubation. It is thought about, discussed, agreed upon and then implemented. The idea appears in a national context. But the departure from it is not thought through or debated. This was done as a political expedient to reduce the ongoing agitation. Therefore, from the clumsy preparation of actions, through its confusion, placatory guarantees and half-hearted implementation that characterized the departure of the six and a half-decade-old mature Republic of the core regulatory principles of its political geography. Republicans cannot afford the clumsy and thoughtless handling of major deviations from core regulatory principles. The bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and its outcome deserves a deeper and mature examination to ensure a firm footing for our Republic.
Parakala Prabhakar is a political economist and author of ‘The Crooked Timber Of New India: Essays on a Republic in Crisis’