The editorial “Correct diagnosis, wrong cure” (Dec. 9) was balanced and farsighted. It is true that there are imbalances in growth and development across the three regions and sub-regions of Andhra Pradesh. But is bifurcation of the State a solution to the problem? The backwardness of the Telangana region is not necessarily due to a “conspiracy of neglect,” as alleged by the votaries of a separate state. Historically, it has been a victim of a semi-feudal system, which slowed down the emergence of robust productive forces. Canal irrigation accompanied by other socio-economic infrastructure improvement in education and health put southern, coastal Andhra ahead of the other regions by 1956, when Andhra Pradesh was formed.
Regional imbalance was not addressed by successive Chief Ministers, including those who hailed from Telangana. Regional Development Boards were constituted but they remained ineffective. The strengthening of the Boards is the only rational solution to the persistent complaints of neglect.
TRS leader K. Chandrasekhar Rao, who could barely win support in the last election, could do nothing other than playing with people’s emotions to remain in the limelight. It is true that Telangana has not seen development for years, thanks to naxalism and the prevalence of feudalism.
Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy did his best to uplift the region. It is surprising that KCR and company, who did not voice their demand during YSR’s tenure, have suddenly felt the need to launch a movement. The media have also contributed to the chaos. They should stop sensationalising the issue and causing panic.
In the midst of a chaotic situation, when most sections of the media are highlighting the cause of a separate state, the editorial examines the issue objectively and rightly says that bifurcation is not the solution. The situation in Andhra Pradesh would have been different had there been a regional daily like The Hindu.
V. Sreemannarayana Murthy,
If the Centre agrees to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh, it will pave the way for similar demands by other States. It is time Parliament took a decision to freeze the division of States into smaller ones in the name of development.
M. Ceeraj Kumar,
If the demand for a separate Telangana is conceded, the people of Rayalaseema and the Andhra region are bound to make a similar demand.
How long does the government at the Centre and in the State propose to treat the issue casually? Such burning issues should not be left to the whims of an individual.
K. Bhaskara Rao,
How can a few people take the law into their hands and impose their sentiment on the rest? In a democracy, people give their verdict every five years and we are stuck with it. In the latest elections, all political parties that supported a separate Telangana fared poorly.
S. Sudhir Kumar,
Soon after independence, fragmented states were united to make the nation stronger. But today vote-bank politics is making a bid to fragment the composite structure, misleading people and spreading regionalism. Why should people pay the price for the failure of political leadership?
Had statehood been the solution to lack of development, Jharkhand would have been the most prosperous State. The focus should be on inclusive development.
Md. Shakeeb Sayem,
Geographically, Hyderabad is part of Telangana but people from all regions live there. Nearly 30 per cent of Andhra Pradesh’s revenue comes from the city. How can two States share it? River water-sharing is another issue that is likely to emerge. Also the fact that naxal-hit Chhattisgarh shares the border with some districts of Telangana needs to be kept in mind.
The establishment of district-level governments should address the problems of the Telangana region.
The differences among politicians threaten to break up Andhra Pradesh into many small entities. If it happens, language and shared culture will no longer be a unifying factor.
The unfolding events in the State carry a warning to other States to beware of the disruptive designs of their representatives.
Both Karnataka (then Mysore) and Andhra Pradesh came into existence in 1956. After the initial euphoria died down, there were complaints of neglect from the districts of north Karnataka and the Telangana region in Andhra Pradesh. There was even a demand for a separate north Karnataka. The Karnataka government addressed the problem of imbalance by constituting a committee and implemented its recommendations by setting apart funds.
Far more important was the intermingling of poets from different regions of Karnataka. It was their literary genius that stirred the image of Akhanda Karnataka. It is sad that the song Maa Telugu Talliki Mallepu Danda sung by Tangaturi Suryakumari arousing the sentiment for the unification of Andhra, has lost its rhythm today and attempts are being made to negate the sacrifice of Potti Sriramulu who laid down his life for the cause of a united Andhra.
Has Telangana really got a raw deal? This question should be discussed objectively rather than emotionally. What are the advantages and disadvantages of remaining together and bifurcating?
By separating from Andhra Pradesh, the people of Telangana will lose the advantages they gain from the agriculturally rich coastal area and mineral rich Rayalaseema.