Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu is quite vocal in making it clear that he is among the senior-most politicians in the country, having just completed four decades in public life. As a shrewd politician he has kept his party, the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), afloat and politically relevant through changing times. Yet after he decided to pull out of the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance government and move a no-confidence motion against the Narendra Modi government over the Centre’s refusal to grant special category status (SCS) to Andhra Pradesh, he is being ridiculed as one who has waded into competitive politics with his younger political rival and YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) leader, Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy, whom he considers a greenhorn.
That seasoned leaders such as Mr. Naidu are forced to follow this course once again demonstrates that local political and electoral compulsions and regional versus national interests matter, however politically savvy they may be.
To a casual observer, it may appear puzzling why Mr. Naidu has taken this stand when the Centre has announced an alternative special assistance measure (SAM) for Andhra Pradesh.
But a closer look shows that it has only been a trickle and there is bewilderment locally at the Central government’s argument that “it is not sentiment, but the constitutional award of the Finance Commission which decides the quantum of funds that States get”. Perceived as being insensitive, this became a key factor that ruptured relations between the TDP and the BJP.
The perception
The people of the State believe that they are bearing the brunt of an irrational and hasty bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh (under the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance) that has now left them without a capital city, a huge revenue deficit and no big industry. The BJP’s stand is being perceived as a second betrayal by the second national party.
Many questions are flying in the political wind. If the SCS is based on features of a State such as ‘hilly and difficult terrain, low population density or a sizeable tribal population, strategic location, economic backwardness and non-viable nature of State finances’, why did the then Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, in a debate in the Rajya Sabha on the A.P. Reorganisation Act, say that the SCS would be “extended to the successor State of Andhra Pradesh... for a period of five years”? And why has the BJP now ruled out the possibility of the SCS after pushing its extension for 10 years?
When almost every political entity is in agreement that Andhra Pradesh has been left in a distinctly disadvantaged position requiring “special” care, why the argument that other States will start making similar demands? Is there no scope for political intervention to help such States in a cooperative federalism? If the SCS is such an impractical scheme, why are the people not being taken into confidence and educated about its shortcomings?
The SCS has become a stick to beat political rivals with. For the YSRCP, it has come in handy to embarrass the TDP. Mr. Naidu did try to convince people in the State to accept the special assistance measure but dropped it midway after the Centre’s stance. A concerted campaign by the Opposition, social organisations and the media in favour of the SCS also ensured that it became an emotive issue that was projected as being tied to ‘Telugu self- respect’.
Other grievances
In the end, Mr. Naidu appeared to have been left with no alternative but to back the SCS narrative. There were also a host of other contentious issues such as bridging the revenue deficit, fulfilment of provisions of the A.P. Reorganisation Act, funds for the Polavaram irrigation project, the capital city, and other infrastructure projects. The BJP’s stance on “alliance dharma”, by encouraging Mr. Naidu’s political rivals in terms of either granting them an audience or launching verbal attacks against him, was also a sore point, an example being Jana Sena Party leader, Pawan Kalyan’s attack on Mr. Naidu and his son, Information Technology Minister Nara Lokesh. Others attribute the political break-up to problems in the Naidu-Modi chemistry, which go back to 2002 and the backdrop of the Gujarat riots.
Amid the political jostling, it is clear that there is a trust deficit. After BJP spokesperson G.V.L. Narasimha Rao said that “far from being a threat, the TDP’s exit is an opportunity for the BJP to grow in A.P.”, Mr. Naidu levelled a fresh charge that the BJP was desperately trying to replicate Tamil Nadu-type politics by pitting one party against the other in order to create political space for itself.
In this context, it is important to note that senior TDP leaders have backed Mr. Naidu on this especially as the State accounts for 25 Lok Sabha seats, and will be a crucial factor in the 2019 election.
venkateshwarlu.k@thehindu.co.in
