Mid Path?

As most of the netizens probably are born much after the independence, it might help to recount what happened during independence. When British were running India, there were three types of territories within what is today known as Indian sub-continent. A) Areas fully controlled and ruled by British empire -- called british India B) Those that were independent entities but the British had the suzerainty over them - called princely states and C) The areas ruled by non-British countries such as Portuguese, Dutch etc...

When the English left India, they had transferred the control over British India fully to Indian/Pakistan governments but gave three options to the so called independent kingdoms or princely states as they were popularly called then I) to accede to India or II) to accede to Pakistan or III) to remain independent. Sardar Vallabhai Patel took the humongous task of integrating the 550+ princely states that were existing as independent nations within the boundary of today's India, through many different means such as allurement, coercion, and even by military action. Although many of them were small states ruled by chieftains and small time kings, some were really large such as Bhopal, Baroda, Jaisalmar, Mysore, Hyderabad etc...but in the end most states acceded to India. Three states need to be mentioned here though...Kashmir - a Muslim majority country ruled by a Hindu king, Junagadh in present day Gujarat and Hyderabad - both Hindu majority countries but ruled by muslim kings. We know the history of Kashmir, but many of us don't know that both Junagadh and Hyderabad wanted to cede to Pakistan, or remain independent. Junagadh king was thrown out by his own people and Hyderabad was annexed into Indian union through a limited army operation by Indian forces. This is where the first seeds of separatist sentiments developed in Telangana region. After the military operation, Hyderabad state was part of Indian union and the first ever general elections to the parliament and all the constituent states were held in 1952. And then came the states reorganisation and creation of states based on linguistics in 1956, combining and/or splitting in various ways many earlier states of Madras, Bombay, Travancore, Mysore, Hyderabad etc...portions of erstwhile Hyderabad state were merged with Karnataka, portions with Maharashtra and the remaining 10 districts - known today as the Telangana region, with Andhra Pradesh. (Even before states reorganisation committee came into existence, Andhra Pradesh was formed by splitting Rayalaseema and coastal Andhra districts from the then madras presidency in 1952).

If the fact that they were ruled by a different entity at the time of independence be the reason for creating separate state today, I am sure we will have to create 550+ states again. This is a dangerous trend. If earlier boundaries of kingdoms need to be redrawn today, where will we stop? Should we tear apart then the southern states to Kirshna Devaraya's Vijayanagara, Chera, Chola, Pandaya, Hoysala, Kakatheeya, Pallava, Chalukya boundaries? It just doesn't make sense. But, hey sense is the last thing you would expect from today’s politicians.

The current situation is very precarious for almost all political parties. TRS is clear on its stand. They want to establish themselves as unquestionable champions of Telangana and don’t care two hoots for the rest of Andhra Pradesh. Kirankumar Reddy is taking a pugilistic stance against his own party high command and the central government. Jaganmoham Reddy is screaming from rooftops that he will be satisfied with nothing less than a unified Andhra. All government employees unions are vociferous in their demand to keep the state united. But, what is essentially missing from this view point is that, united Andhra is possible, if and only if both parties agree to stay united. You cannot certainly force unity on one section of the populace that does not want to stay together come what may. It can certainly be argued that the minds of the people in Telangana area are totally poisoned and their hearts are filled with hatred and violence, fanned by self-centered politicians and vested interest groups over many years. But, that is besides the point. We are where we are, and we need only to look forward. This popular view taken by general public in Seema-andhra and the above mentioned political and employee groups’ is almost naive. It is clear to most of them that Andhra Pradesh may not stay united after 2014 assembly elections. If they keep quiet or agree for the division, in such a case, they have nothing to gain and everything to lose. So they take their stand clearly knowing what is up for grabs and what is at stake. It's like this: if you support the division, you can do politics only in Telangana, and if you oppose it, you can do politics only in residuary Andhra Pradesh. Given this ground reality, it is not difficult to figure why these political parties take such a stand.

One political party that seems to have some amount of balancing act going and trying to survive in both regions is the TDP headed by Chandra Babu Naidu. From the beginning he kept his policy as ambiguous as possible, with broad strokes and no details. He is still playing his cards close to his chest and has so far been able to keep people from both regions guessing. He is demanding 'sama nyayam' - i.e equal justice. He is neither saying divide Andhra Pradesh nor keep it united. The formula for sama-nyayam or what it means, is not elucidated anywhere by anyone of his party members or himself. All the other political players want him to either side with Separatists or Samaikyandhraites, so that his turf becomes clearer and it would be easy to take him on. But Chandra Babu is looking to keep his party rooted both in Telangana and the rest of Andhra Pradesh. Interestingly Chandra Babu Naidu has done a master stroke in taking his fast to Delhi. For the entire national media has gotten the gist of what's going on in Andhra Pradesh. And most importantly he has put some fear in the hearts of Congress men that BJP may not just let the bill pass, if it comes to that. That's a brilliant strategy.

It must also be noted that TDP is the party that was created for Telugu people and the address of Hyderabad, in the independent India, is clearly known only after Telugu Desam supremo N.T.Rama Rao assumed the office of chief minister in 1983. Until then, Hyderabad was not in the reckoning for anything, except for dusty streets around Charminar, ruins of Golkonda fort and the once famous Salarjung museum. During NTRs time and then during Chandra Babu Naidu’s regime, Hyderabad became one of the fastest developing cities in India, surpassing Bangalore and even Chennai on many fronts. It became a default destination for high-tech IT companies world over. That changed the shapes and fortunes of Andhra Pradesh and concentrated most of the state’s wealth in one or two districts around Hyderabad. State of the art international airport, beautiful Hussein Sagar tank, educational institutions reflecting international standards, manufacturing hubs, fabrications units -- just about everything was developed around Hyderabad. Telangana proponents saw in this a great opportunity to have the cake and eat it as well and the opponents their entire future dreamt and staked around one area, just going burst in thin air. That's where we are today. Doomed if you move ahead, and doomed if you don't.

Divided or unified Andhra? -  is the question that needs to be answered immediately. Either answer will disappoint a big section of people, so, I say "yes" to both. Division it is - 10 districts including Hyderabad, for anything less will be unacceptable to people of Telangana and I also say "unified Andhra", for anything less is unacceptable to Seema-andhra people.

I am sure you are wondering how is that going to be possible. No one can have the cake and eat it too. But here is my humble suggestion on how this could be made possible. Let there be a resolution in the assembly agreeing to carve out a state of Telangana with 10 districts including Hyderabad, with the following conditions...

I. State of Andhra Pradesh will be united and function as is only for the next 10 years (the same time frame proposed to keep Hyderabad as joint capital).

II. In the year 2024 Telangana and the rest of Andhra Pradesh will have separate assembly elections and will exist as two separate states.

III. With immediate effect the creation and construction of a new capital city around Vijayawada, Guntur, Tenali area (i believe this to be the best location for the new capital) or any other suitable area and complete it within 10 years and ready to occupy in 2024 as the capital for residual Andhra Pradesh.

IV. Build power projects in Telangana region to make it self-sufficient in power by 2024

V.  Work out amicable water sharing formula without impacting farmers in either region.

VI. Whatever money required to build the new capital city and the infrastructure required for the same will be borne by the united Andhra Pradesh government and/or can be funded by central government, world bank or other international organisations, and the debts that may be outstanding in the beginning of year 2024 will be proportionately divided per capita between Telangana and the rest of Andhra Pradesh.

VII.   A special central cabinet ministry be setup to govern and oversee the above activities, although the planning and execution of the same be fully rested with state government or a committee.

VIII. There should be readiness on both groups of people to exchange few taluks or mandals across border districts, based on practical and/or administrative considerations. (Particularly where water ways or canals can create unnecessary hurdles)

IX.   Address all issues and concerns related to the government employees. 

These I feel could ease the pain of this rather difficult separation that could have well been avoided had the powers that be operated in a manner more conducive to India’s growth, development and well-being.

Also to note is that it no longer makes sense for the employee unions to say, we don't want to align with political parties. Ultimately, no matter what happens, it's the political parties that need to plan or implement a solution in a democracy. It may be okay to say, we will not join your agitation, for we don't want to get your colours painted on us, but if they want to come join us in our struggle we should be willing to accommodate them, and give them some minimal restrictions like, they should not castigate other parties and they shouldn't be talking about party politics etc....For it is essential to keep the communication channels open with all of them at all the times. By doing so, who knows, we may actually have Kirankumar Reddy, Jagan Mohan Reddy and Chandra Babu Naidu on the same dais with Ashok Babu one day.