Telangana, the 29th State of the Indian Union came into being on June 2, 2014 after a long drawn-out struggle of more than six and half decades. Its birth of ushered in new hope, desire and the wishes of people along with anxieties over its growth and development.
The text of Telangana’s Statehood should be read within the context of the historical project of State formation of Andhra Pradesh. Now, following a year of its existence, Telangana offers some useful insights and perspectives over the future of the federal structure of the Indian state particularly in terms of the internal restructuring of its constituents (States). The lessons learnt should guide the substantive issues of State formation as a political and cultural project, and its multiple forms of power. State formation is not simply a bureaucratically designed, technical-rational affair but one that is densely located within the social imaginaries and their durable forms. It is instructive to see how these forms acquire ideological legitimacy over time and begin to affect the political processes of State formation. However, what is noteworthy in this is the collaboration — ideological and political — between various classes and stakeholders whose interests begin to be affected soon after the creation of the State.
Social inequalities
The demand for Telangana raised issues of inter/intra-State regional inequalities and their associated forms of domination and subordination over people belonging to different regional and subregional locations. The feudal forms of domination and atrocities perpetrated over the marginalised sections, especially tribals and peasants, continue to obstruct equitable resources and funds distribution. Unless the government of the day is serious about ameliorating these inequalities, its various schemes and programmes of social welfare and empowerment of the disadvantaged sections will remain incomplete in realising the “Telangana Sentiment”. Telangana’s historic struggle has informed how the matrix of socio-economic inequalities can produce new sites of public sphere and of their potential to transform democratic spaces. It is in this context that the Telangana State must show the way not simply for “change” but for “transformation”; not just for the power of politics but for social justice and equality moving beyond mere identity politics. The battle over the appropriation of symbols and icons of the Telangana struggle must not be reduced to a sheer war of words and images among competing groups and political parties. The symbolic politics must not be divorced from the everydayness of the life struggles of peasants, tribals and other deprived sections. The political iconographies of the Telangana struggle must provide newer vocabularies to write new scripts and registers of development. They must ensure the legible language of basic human rights and entitlements for the disadvantaged sections. This requires that the State must ensure the fair distribution of resources and opportunities of work among people regardless of their native origins or places of residence.
Within two months after its formation, a Statewide household survey, Samagra Kutumba Survey, was held on August 19, 2014 to count and number people of “native origins” as being historically justified residents of Telangana in order to separate them off from “non-natives” or outsiders. It was feared that the data collected would be politically used to strengthen the strongholds of the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) across the State, and to determine the potential beneficiaries of government schemes. Any kind of enumerative logic, as Ian Hacking us reminded long ago, can have serious implications for producing identity politics. A move for nativity or indigeneity can’t provide legitimate grounds for democratic politics. The territorial rights and the identities of people can’t be arbitrarily ascribed. The process of a democratisation of rights is instantly halted once the enumerative logic begins to count, classify and categorise people and their identities to suit the particular interests of the State. Surveys and statistical classifications can help only if the State wants to reach out to the people to provide non-discriminatory benefits of its various developmental policies, programmes and initiatives. However, the reason of the state in both substantive and procedural affairs must not contradict itself with the affinity of people based on their history, language, culture and region. These affinities alert us about the formation of newer hierarchies and their forms of inequalities penetrating into the discourses of development and democracy. Mr. K. Chandrasekhar Rao, Chief Minister of Telangana, should learn from what Mr. N. Chandrababu Naidu, Chief Minister of an undivided Andhra Pradesh, did in 1995 in terms of a household survey to determine the agenda of economic reform. Let the enumeration not become a conduit for the market or corporate rationality.
As model State The special package status under Article 371-D, that the Telangana Chief Minister demanded from the Centre within a week of its formation, must not be to simply fulfil populistic schemes. The bifurcation has significant implications for resource generation and a flow of funds for both the States. At the time of the oath-taking ceremony, KCR’s pledge of making Telangana “a role model for other States in India” can be redeemed only if the funds and resource allocation for developmental projects are based on principles of equitable and fair distribution among the most marginalised and disadvantaged sections. His dream of making a “State from power-deficit to [a] power-surplus state” in the next five years can only come true only if there is a neutrality, transparency and accountability of governance at all levels. This entails that issues related to land alienation and acquisition, disenfranchisement and disempowerment of tribals and peasants from their land and labour must be addressed on a priority. Land rights and resources, the latter in terms of rich mineral and natural resources — must be re-examined keeping in mind the questions of tribal rights over the habitation and the use of the land they have historically been part of. Farmer suicides, agrarian distress, irrigation, and the sharing of river water should be analysed to provide answers beyond mere government announcements of various kinds. The new industrial, semi-urban and smart city projects can only bring in a real estate boom and further increase economic inequalities. The issue of landlessness of tribals, peasants and marginalised sections must not be forgotten in this dream of making Telangana a model State for others.
State reorganisation Much like the States of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Uttarakhand formed in 2000, Telangana too has moved away from language affinity as the sole basis of State formation to a more complex network of socio-economic, political-ideological and regional bases of identities favouring the creation of States in contemporary times. Ever since the initial voices of protest after its merger into Andhra Pradesh in 1956, it has continued to be in the forefront of political visions based on the equitable distribution of resources, inclusive political participation, recognition of cultural identities and their social diversity. The significant changes ushered in from earlier decades of the processes of States’ reorganisation to the contemporary calls for the creation of smaller States show critical shifts in Indian politics over questions of state authority and its territorial claims.
The resolution of the Congress Working Committee in 2001 for the setting up the Second State Reorganization Commission (SSRC) was meant to evaluate the rationale of demands for smaller States such as Telangana, Vidarbha, Marathwada, a division of Uttar Pradesh and various others. It is now time that the SSRC is constituted by the Central government to take stock of these demands in a more comprehensive manner. The period 1953-56 tells us an epic story about the creation of Andhra State and its subsequent reorganisation as Andhra Pradesh in 1956. Not only was the territorial map of the country reconfigured with the recommendations of State Reorganization Commission but also the federal design and the democratic potential of the Indian state was put into place giving specific powers to the Centre over its units. Telangana State and its democratic road map will certainly enable the federal architecture of the Indian State to bring in newer promises and wishes of an egalitarian and just social-political order.
(Asha Sarangi is a Professor at the Centre for Political Studies, JNU, New Delhi.)
