The Congress-led UPA Government is on a determined course to carve out the new State of Telangana. But the Congress Working Committee resolution left several issues ambiguous, which would become contentious when it comes to the brass tacks of bifurcation.

Three critical issues stand out: Hyderabad, employment and water resources. Hyderabad is a known Gordian knot. Employment is already on its course to become a source of rancour and friction between the two new States.

The Telangana Rashtriya Samithi (TRS) chief K. Chandrasekhar Rao has recently asked the Seemandhra-born government staff to leave Telangana. The third, water resources sharing, is much more serious than what it appears to be.

The former two are in the nature of one-time settlement issues, but water sharing can be a recurring source of tension between the states.

Seeds of discord

The creation of Telangana State may be the sign of a new wave of federal politics in India. However, political parties and leaders need to step away from their immediate political interests and mull over these new politics with sagacity and statesmanship. But unfortunately, political opportunism seems to be the defining character of creating the two new states.

If the reports of including the Rayalaseema districts of Kurnool and Anantapur in Telangana are true, this is deeply shortsighted. The move is apparently for achieving two political objectives: to check the influence of the TRS in Telangana State and dent the alleged strength of the YSR Congress in the new Andhra Pradesh.

Though the calculations look good on paper, they can be seriously fallacious and misleading. First, if the sentiment has transcended party lines and caste calculations in Telangana, the same sentiment for a united Andhra can seal the fate of the Congress in Andhra Pradesh.

Even if Congress manages to keep its flock together, the sentiment may just swing in favour of the YSR Congress party, which maintained somewhat consistent stand for a united Andhra PradeshState.

Second, Rayalaseema districts in Telangana State will ensure continued dominance of identity politics in the Telangana political scene. The divisive and antagonistic political rhetoric during the past decade long Telangana agitation has widened the fault lines between the regions.

This time, the backward Rayalaseema districts will most likely complain discrimination by Telangana dominated administration. Or at least, that will be a promising route for Rayalaseema leaders.

UPSTREAM state

There are other substantive reasons as well for avoiding such political calculations. Inclusion of Kurnool and Anantapur districts will turn Telangana State into fully an upstream State with respect to the Andhra State. All major rivers, Godavari, Krishna and Tungabhadra, will then be flowing into Andhra Pradesh from Telangana State.

Irrespective of how well we define equitable allocation, politicisation of water disputes will provide a new and fertile ground for antagonistic politics to thrive.

The trans-boundary politics of the two states will be similar to that we witness in the Cauvery dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, where water disputes are a way of pursuing politics.

Andhra Pradesh enjoys advanced irrigation development and seeks to protect their rights of prior appropriation, just as in Tamil Nadu.

Telangana and Andhra Pradesh will have similar histories of unevenness and inequities as Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. This asymmetry, combined with histories of prejudice and antagonistic politics, may lead to frequent recurrence of water disputes.

It is unfortunate that these issues do not receive adequate attention.

Even during the first States’ Reorganisation Commission, there were demands for a separate Telangana State. But the commission favoured keeping it united Andhra Pradesh for better management of water resources in the Godavari and the Krishna basins.

WATER DISPUTES

Redistribution of water resources and ensuring amicable political relations between the two states has to be central to the bifurcation process.

The state of affairs with respect to inter-state water disputes resolution does not help much. It relies excessively on legal means, which did not help much in disputes like Cauvery. Litigation in courts or tribunals will only encourage a hide-and-seek behaviour by states and politicisation of disputes.

Managing the inter-state relations for smooth transition and coordinating contentious matters such as river water sharing will be crucial.

Telangana and Andhra Pradesh politics will be characterised by antagonistic rhetoric against each other, at least for some time.

Political opportunism of the Centre will only aggravate these politics further, leading to tenuous inter-state relations. It is time to think innovatively about the right kind of institutions for coordinating interstate relations and managing tensions between the two states, at least in the medium term.

There is little hope of constructive politics from either side. Political leaders are driven by insecurities and short term political gains.

A major crisis of our times is the dearth of leaders with courage and fortitude to take positions in the larger interests. Let us hope institutions will rise to the challenge.

(The author is with Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.).

Related Topics