Given that territorial disputes and separatism are great interests of mine, I took note of yesterday’s news that a new state will be created in India. It is important to note though that, “The process of forming the state of Telangana will be initiated” and thus while likely, there is no guarantee.
India announced on Thursday that it planned to create the country’s 29th state, after a hunger strike by a regional leader and escalating protests from supporters. Home Minister P. Chidambaram said the government would begin work to found the separate state of Telangana, which will be carved out of Andhra Pradesh in the southeast. [...]
Since the partition of British-ruled India in 1947, various separatist and state movements have raged across the vast nation. Three new states were created in 2000, when Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh were divided to give rise to Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand.
Although a precedent by no means, it may still take years to actually come into being and around 60 state legislaters that day turned in resignations in protest. By today, that number is up to around 130.
Background
After Indian independence in 1947, events not unlike today’s played out. In an effort to gain an independent state, and protect the interests of the Telugu people of Madras State, Amarajeevi Potti Sreeramulu fasted until death. Public outcry and civil unrest after his death forced the government to announce the formation of a new state for Telugu speaking people. Andhra attained statehood on 1 October 1953, with Kurnool as its capital.
And yet, three years later, on 1 November 1956, the Andhra State merged with the Telangana region of Hyderabad State to form the state of Andhra Pradesh. Hyderabad, the former capital of the Hyderabad State, was made the capital of the new state Andhra Pradesh.
Just over a year ago, in November 2008, the Nava Telangana Party declared the region’s statehood. Thus, today’s announcement is no surprise given the regions 60+ years of unrest and seeking autonomy/independence.
Questions
1) Will this new state be economically viable? How will it earn revenue with a smaller, poorer tax base?
2) Will a new smaller state with a more homogenous population and thus government actually be able to govern more effectively?
3) Will this further propel the Hyderabad region upwards as it no longer has the anchor of poorer regions dragging it down?
4) How will this affect the balance of power between the individual states? And how will it affect the balance between political parties? Andhra Pradesh will lose voting power nationally with the creation of a new state and the new Telangana is far more likely to gravitate left than right. What does this mean for the major politically parties like the INC and BJP?
5) How will this affect the endless other separatist groups (violent and nonviolent) and ethnic minorities agitating for more autonomy? Will this make India more or less stable?
6) What will the long term effects be of this new states success or failure?
Final Comments
Although it is unlikely this issue will receive much more international attention, it will be of interest to India watchers and especially those interested in devolution, separatism and related issues. Newly independent states such as Kosovo are often the most studied while developments such as this inside functioning states and that are legally sanctioned receive less attention. I’ll try to keep an eye on this and would always appreciate further comments from readers who may have more to add.
Interesting. Of the two great Asian republics that formed after World War II in Asia (India and China), India created an example of warlike expansion and aggression that lead to a centralization of authority within the subcontinent and general chaos with regard to international stability. [1] Fortunately, New Delhi’s example was not followed, and Asia has had much more peace than the actions of the warlike Congress Party would have normally implied.
It’s good to see India slowly backpedal from this… though the prospect of the Union granting self-determination to its captive nations seems quite remote.
[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2009/08/28/tibet-in-context.html
I’ll be amazed if India doesn’t splinter by 2050. It’s a multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic empire by any definition. Eventually one of the periodic self-determination waves will rupture India as we know it today.
The trend toward ethnic and culturally based statehood, in India and elsewhere, is a troubling one. For the sake of regional and global stability, the international community should discourage the formation of countries along nationalistic lines. It is tremendously dangerous to combine the prejudices and interests of a cultural group with the legitimacy and resources of a state.
David: I’d actually disagree. The myriad of ethnic groups, languages, religions and cultures are in fact what make India work so well, all balancing each other and creating a vibrant democracy. This is in contrast to other countries that have a clear majority that then discriminate against minority group(s).
Thomas: I’m not so sure. The idea of self-determination is a century or so old and still recognized as legitimate. While there have been ugly manifestations of this, it is not inherently bad as you seem to suggest.
It is a good sign that India, which is way too big to govern in monolithic fashion, and which is more diverse than Europe, has a political mechanism in place to reshuffle the deck and create new sub-units without bloodshed.
I wish them luck with this. I hope it works out.
Vibrant democracy?
Vibrant meaning… what? That people start hunger strikes every time they want something ? A communist insurgency rampant for decades? Villages with a white line drawn on the ground separating muslims and others? Corruption and wholesale vote buying?
India now is corrupt without money, wait until they get to Chinese levels of prosperity and money politics will end the polity there. India is not sustainable.
Hi, your blog is cute. I’m from Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India. Well, as you have posted, now government had started the appropriate measures for the formation of a new state in India. And I’m happy that I’m going to be a part of Telangana. And it’s 100% justifiable because and many areas in Telangana could become developed. While in Andhra, people are very rich than compared to Telangana. Due to this decision of the central government, 127 MLA’s in Andhra Pradesh have resigned. But, there resignations have not been approved yet. If they are, then probably the ruling government, i.e, Congress would fall and there are more number of chances for TDP party to come into power. But, now due to the resolution passed by the government to form a separate Telangana, many strikes have been taking place in Andhra, especially by the students of Andhra University. So, may be Hyderabad could become a union territory and be the capitol for Telangana as well as Andhra Pradesh(Andhra & Rayalaseema). But the veteran TRS president KCR and his party members won’t agree and this could lead to many problems. Let’s wait and see what would happen.
Map please!!!
Pragmatic Euphony has posted another set of rather interesting questions, for those interested in the topic.
Chirol, those are all interesting questions that I look forward to seeing answered as the process unfolds. Also, if I may be so bold, this topic is interesting to consider in light of my post that followed yours on the Velvet Divorce.