Left parties have different views on the division of Andhra Pradesh. While the Communist Party of India (Marxist) said the UPA government decided to create Telangana keeping in mind the 2014 general election, the Communist Party of India welcomed the decision. Likewise, the Revolutionary Socialist Party opposed the decision, but the Forward Bloc endorsed it.
“After long procrastination and more than two years after the Srikrishna Committee submitted its report, the Congress leadership and the UPA government have decided on… the formation of Telangana. This decision seems to have been impelled by the Lok Sabha elections. It will give a fillip to demands for separate States in other places,” the CPI(M) polit bureau said in a statement on Wednesday.
The party said it had always stood for the integrity of the States, on the democratic principle of linguistic States, and appealed to people of all regions of Andhra Pradesh to maintain peace until Parliament decided on the issue.
The CPI said the “inevitable” decision was delayed by the wavering on the part of the Congress. The party termed it a victory for the struggles of the people of Telangana and assured them that it would vote for the proposal in Parliament. It appealed to the agitating students and youth in some parts of the State to maintain peace.
The party urged the Central and State governments to work towards inspiring hope among students and youth of Costal Andhra and Rayalaseema that their future was assured.
The Forward Bloc wanted a Vidarbha State carved out of Maharashtra, saying the “historical, geographical, cultural and social facts justify the demand.” It also demanded the establishment of the second State Reorganisation Committee to “find a justifiable solution for all pending demands for small States.” It berated the Congress for delaying the creation of Telangana and “befooling the people of the region” for so long.
But the RSP said it was against the formation of smaller States and pointed out that it had even opposed Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand when they were formed.
“If the people want and the government agrees, we don’t have anything to do. But the demand for small States is borne out of the need for speedy development. However, our experience in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh has shown that this is not happening. There is no development of the people in these tribal-dominated States,” it said.
