Context-

The tenth anniversary of the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana offers an opportunity to examine the political, economic, and historical implications of this division for the Telugu people and the broader Indian Republic.

Background

• Dissipation of Disputes : The intense disputes that characterized the bifurcation discourse for nearly half a decade have now dissipated, with both Andhra Pradesh and Telangana moving forward with little sentiment for their five and a half-decades together. For people in the newly formed Andhra Pradesh, only Hyderabad from Telangana holds significant value, while the people of Telangana show minimal interest in the regions now within Andhra Pradesh.
• Historical Context and Puzzlement : This lack of sentiment is puzzling given the historical context. These regions were under different political authorities for only about 150 years before the Nizam ceded coastal and Rayalaseema districts to European powers. Historically, they were ruled from Golconda and Hyderabad for a long time and were reunited in 1956. Despite these long years of shared governance, a strong sense of togetherness failed to develop, leading to their eventual separation.

Comparing Linguistic Divides

• Telugu vs. Kannada and Marathi : The question arises as to why the unity based on language among Telugu elites from both Madras Presidency and Hyderabad State is frailer compared to the unity among Kannada and Marathi elites. While regional economic disparities, linguistic divergences, lifestyle differences, and variations in political culture exist across all three linguistic groups, only the Telugus have experienced a division. This raises concerns about the future of other linguistic states.
• Potential Unravelling : Does the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh foreshadow the eventual unraveling of the Indian Republic’s political architecture along linguistic lines? Given that most states in India, except for a few central ones, are organized on a linguistic basis, the fragility of this organizing principle becomes a crucial question. If linguistic unity cannot hold, alternative principles based on territory size or population might need to be considered.

Political and Economic Implications

• Redistribution of Political Power : The bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh has altered the political landscape significantly. Previously, united Andhra Pradesh held 42 Lok Sabha seats, making it a significant player in national politics. Post-division, Andhra Pradesh now holds 25 seats, making it smaller than Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. Telangana, with 17 seats, is smaller than Kerala. This redistribution diminishes their political clout in the national arena.

• Federal Imbalance : If some states become smaller while others remain large, it could lead to grossly unequal political equations, resulting in strains within the federal structure. Unequal representation in the central legislature could lead to perceptions of favoritism, potentially causing disenchantment and dissent among smaller states.

Emerging Issues and Delayed Grievances

• Telangana’s Euphoria : In Telangana, the initial euphoria of achieving statehood and the subsequent economic boom, particularly in Hyderabad, have delayed the political expression of grievances. However, as the euphoria wears off, issues stemming from the bifurcation process may surface, necessitating a focus on unresolved grievances.
• Andhra Pradesh’s Obsessions : Andhra Pradesh, meanwhile, has oscillated between ambitious projects like building a world-class capital and implementing extensive direct benefit transfer (DBT) welfarism. These obsessions have left the state financially strained. Unfulfilled promises from the Centre regarding special category status and financial aid for the capital city, as well as unresolved division of assets, will eventually come to the fore.

Linguistic Reorganization: A Historical Perspective

• Thoughtful Implementation : The idea of linguistic reorganization of India had a long incubation period, characterized by thorough debate and national consensus before implementation. It was intended to unify people based on linguistic identity, ensuring coherent administrative units.
• Clumsy Departure : In contrast, the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh was hastily implemented to pacify an ongoing agitation, resulting in a clumsy and poorly executed division. The hurried drafting and passing of the bifurcation act, along with half-hearted implementation of placatory assurances, highlight the dangers of departing from core organizing principles without adequate thought and planning.

Future Considerations

• Revisiting Organizing Principles : The Indian Republic must reconsider its core organizing principles to prevent future divisions based on linguistic or regional lines. If linguistic unity proves insufficient, principles based on territory size, population, or other criteria might need to be explored to ensure a balanced and cohesive federal structure.
• Addressing Economic Disparities : Economic disparities between states also need to be addressed to prevent perceptions of favoritism and ensure equitable distribution of resources. Ensuring financial stability and equitable development across states can help mitigate regional tensions.
•  Ensuring Political Stability : Political stability within the Republic requires thoughtful handling of grievances and ensuring that all states feel represented and heard. The lessons from Andhra Pradesh’s bifurcation underscore the need for careful consideration and mature handling of major political changes.

Conclusion

The bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh provides a crucial case study of the complexities of linguistic reorganization and the potential pitfalls of hastily implemented political changes. The Indian Republic must learn from this experience to ensure that future reconfigurations are handled with the necessary care and thoughtfulness, preserving the unity and stability of the nation. The questions raised by this division about linguistic unity and federal balance cannot be ignored and must be addressed to secure a cohesive and equitable future for India.

Source- The Hindu