145 thoughts on “A New State in India: Telangana”

1. That, or we might see one of those major regional political realignments in Indian politics that can cause seemingly strong governments to fall.

   i think jagan (ysr’s son) is masterminding some of the unrest in revenge against being prevented from inheriting the chief ministership by sonia, and is hoping that the telengana furore will cause rosiah’s govt to fall.

2. Also, do you think these movements might feed a sense of monoculturalist ‘separateness’ that could make the region a less inviting place for people from different ethno-linguistic backgrounds who happen to live there?

   Yes! Yes! A thousand times YES!

   As for “economic opportunity,” the only opportunities being extended here are for more corruption and graft to yet another parochial vote-bank.

3. Amardeep,

   A few corrections and updates:

   1.The Centre has said it is fine with Telangana;it is not final yet. The State Assembly has to pass a resolution and then the Parliament has to pass the Act.Several ruling party and opposition MLAs and MPs have resigned protesting Cong high command’s unilateral announcement last night.It doesn’t look like Telangana is going to happen any time soon.

   2.Languge – we all speak Telugu. Economic reasons – Rayalaseema and North Andhra are more backward than Telangana.

   3.The real reason is the greed of politicians.As simple as that. The people of Telangana have resoundinly voted against TRS in the last general elections. TRS was so scared of losing relevance that they did not even contest in the recent GHMC elections.

   4.Maoists, student wings of BJP, CPM and CPI, and hired goons from Rayalaseema were all part of the supposedly student led agitation this week that saw some violence including a few suicides.The leader who did the fast, KCR, has hardly any credibility among even the Telangana masses.It is just that Cong high command, especially Sonia’s advisers seem to lack political acumen on this matter.Probably the distance from Delhi factor.

   5.The general feeling among Hyderabadis is that had the demise of late CM YSR not happened, this would have been a non-issue. It is just that high command imposed a lame duck CM called Rosaiah, and the many disgruntled elements in State Congress see this as a ruse to get rid of the CM.

   Will post updates tomorrow.Right now, it looks like there will be a political stalemate in the State, and the issue will be drained of any emotional aspects by the time the politicos are done with it.Just what the doctor may have ordered 🙂

4. @Birdie: Got it right, mate !

5. Like you, I don’t really know the background of this particular movement, but I did want to speak more generally about separate states and so forth.

   First of all, if you really want to describe the various cultural groups and languages in India, I think the best comparison is to that of Europe. Europe is a collection of smaller countries with different languages, many of which are closely related but equally tied to identity. Religions and so forth is not too different, yet culture and food vary from country to country.

   I think that a general comparison between Europe and India make sense, the difference being that Europe is a group of countries, and India is a single country. Many of Europe’s present day countries were brought into existence through the ideology of the ‘nation-state’– a nation united for one culturo-linguistic group of people as an ideal (of course, most of these states do have minority groups within them, but the ideology was based on this sense of cultural and linguistic unity)

   India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily. Like many other countries were were formed under colonial rule, there has been debate and separation to attempt to fit a country which is decidedly not a ‘nation-state’ into a nation-state ideal– the separation of Pakistan and Bangladesh were an attempt to make the region more nation-state based– first it was just a single separate state for Muslims– then in broke into two based on linguistic lines.

   So now India is still left with the large middle, the Hindu majority– but it still is no where near the nation-state ideal. With it’s 100s of languages and with so many distinct cultural groups, it can’t really be likened to any other country that I can think of (maybe, perhaps, a country like Indonesia, where cultural groups are distinct on different island groups).

   Given the current nation-state ideology prevalent in the world, I actually find it really surprising that there has not been MORE groups campaigning to become a separate country than there are now (such as Kashmir, etc). Instead, it seems more important for many of the cultural and/or linguistic groups to have their own state status within the country of India.

   That’s where it comes down to weighing the positive and negatives of creating more states in India. Looking at other states that were created in the recent past, I suppose we can analyze whether or not creating more states is a good idea. (I personally don’t have enough information on the current state of the new, urm, states to analyze it myself).

   Generally speaking though, I feel like it would be better to respect and understand a cultural and/or linguistic groups needs, because if a group begins to feel unrecognized or ignored in such a large multicultural/linguistic country, it would be much easier for them to lean towards the direction of their own separate nation-state to serve their needs (as they see them) rather than simply their own state within the country.

6. Also, do you think these movements might feed a sense of monoculturalist ‘separateness’ that could make the region a less inviting place for people from different ethno-linguistic backgrounds who happen to live there?

   yes. trs has strong nativist elements and similar to shiv sena, has a hyderabad for gults undercurrent which could very well make it less inviting for people from other parts of india. of course, while hyd is still a magnet for people from other parts of india because it has many businesses, the it growth there has slowed down significantly in the past several years.

7. Linzi,

   With respect to Telangana, it is neither cultural nor linguistic.And the question of administrative efficiency of a smaller state is laughable in India because the smaller administrative units such as District, Mandal and Village are all suffering from broken systems.

   Unlike other states, in AP, whenever a demand for a separate state was made (Telangana-1969, Andhra-1972), it was always because the incumbent CM was deemed weak and interested politicians (from within Congress) engineered these movements.What’s happening now is just another chapter on the same lines.But Sonia Gandhi is no Indira Gandhi.

8. the it growth there has slowed down significantly in the past several years.

   Care to show any data to show that IT growth in Hyd has slowed down for the past several years?

9. And TRS is no Shiv Sena.This is the first time I am hearing some thing like ‘Hyd is for gults’. The worst that TRS did was statements by its maverick leader about residential schools and colleges owned by Andhra business men.

   As I said earlier, KCR wants Telangana so that he can be CM. The senior Cong leaders from Telangana also want a separate state because that is their only way to get power.A political game where gullible people are being swayed emotionally.

10. India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily.

    I like this standard where any state that doesn’t conform to the European ideal of being ethno-linguistically homogenous is “arbitrary.” How is it any more arbitrary than saying Alsace and Lorraine belong to France rather than Germany? Or randomly putting half of Prussia in Poland for no reason other than the fact that the Allies didn’t like the idea of Prussians running Germany? Or what about Spain’s oft forgotten Catalan and Basque speakers? Why is Portugal it’s own country and they aren’t?

    National borders get drawn and they’re always arbitrary to some extent. India is no exception in this.

11. But Sonia Gandhi is no Indira Gandhi.

    It ain’t for lack of trying I’ll tell you that.

    ‘Hyd is for gults’

    “Gults?”

12. India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily.

    The integration of India was, and remains an Indian imperative.

    Wiki

    The story of the integration of the Indian States

    the separation of Pakistan and Bangladesh were an attempt to make the region more nation-state based

    This was not the justification.

    The making of US foreign policy for South Asia

    In the dying days of the raj at the closeof the second world war, Caroe began to worry about what he came to call, in a prescient phrase, “the wells of power”, the oil resources of the middle east in general and of the Gulf and the Arabian peninsula in particular. For a variety reasons he facilitated, then welcomed the partition of India into successor states, India and Pakistan. Indian independence was expected to bring the anti-imperialist Jawaharlal Nehru to power, an eventuality that Caroe feared not least because Nehru couldn’t be trusted12 to use the diplomatic and military resources of an independent India to secure middle east oil for British use and, more broadly, for the use of the Atlanticist world of America and Europe.

13. India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily.

    The integration of India was, and remains an Indian imperative. The British did not have much to do with it.

    Wiki

    The story of the integration of the Indian States

    the separation of Pakistan and Bangladesh were an attempt to make the region more nation-state based

    This was not the justification.

    The making of US foreign policy for South Asia

    In the dying days of the raj at the closeof the second world war, Caroe began to worry about what he came to call, in a prescient phrase, “the wells of power”, the oil resources of the middle east in general and of the Gulf and the Arabian peninsula in particular. For a variety reasons he facilitated, then welcomed the partition of India into successor states, India and Pakistan. Indian independence was expected to bring the anti-imperialist Jawaharlal Nehru to power, an eventuality that Caroe feared not least because Nehru couldn’t be trusted12 to use the diplomatic and military resources of an independent India to secure middle east oil for British use and, more broadly, for the use of the Atlanticist world of America and Europe.

14. India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily.

    The integration of India was, and remains, an Indian imperative. The British did not have much to do with it.

    Wiki

    The story of the integration of the Indian States

    the separation of Pakistan and Bangladesh were an attempt to make the region more nation-state based

    This was not the justification.

    The making of US foreign policy for South Asia

    In the dying days of the raj at the closeof the second world war, Caroe began to worry about what he came to call, in a prescient phrase, “the wells of power”, the oil resources of the middle east in general and of the Gulf and the Arabian peninsula in particular. For a variety reasons he facilitated, then welcomed the partition of India into successor states, India and Pakistan. Indian independence was expected to bring the anti-imperialist Jawaharlal Nehru to power, an eventuality that Caroe feared not least because Nehru couldn’t be trusted12 to use the diplomatic and military resources of an independent India to secure middle east oil for British use and, more broadly, for the use of the Atlanticist world of America and Europe.

15. Also, do you think these movements might feed a sense of monoculturalist ‘separateness’ that could make the region a less inviting place for people from different ethno-linguistic backgrounds who happen to live there?

    Dunno. None of the recent state creations have been on the basis of linguistic/cultural/racial lines. In some cases they were separate political units under the British and/or before so there may be a hint of nationalism there, but nothing overt. The splits have nominally in the name of administrative efficiency, although probably more the result of political maneuvering. Obviously there were will be some nationalistic jousting between residents of the two new states, but it’s a stretch to say either will show monoculturalist tendencies.

16. I am from Hyderabad, with origins in Andhra and now an NRI with close ties to back home. So far I agree almost 100% with Kumar’s assessment/comments. Except for one: Telangana folks think they are culturally different from Andhra. Telugu dialects spoken are very different. Telangana people had closer ties to Maharashtra and other near geographic areas, and were neglected by ruling classes since Brits. For example, the prosperity of Andhra ( eastern) region during pre-Independence days was in no small measure due to Sir Arthur Cotton’s magnificent work on taming the 2 major rivers – Godavari and Krishna. Hope that small perspective helps see the divide.

    I am scratching my head about many things going on here, especially bizarre how Congress has gone about resolving the issue, both locally and nationally. Weak, corrupt and totally irresponsible. I remember when Hyderabad was laid back and sluggish in the 80s being handed stupid CMs from Delhi. If not for the rapid growth in the past 10+ years and the amazing transformation that took place, AP wouldn’t be as prosperous now or have grown such reputation for being Tech savvy. Look at the major institutions that have sprung up ( like IIIT) as well as major businesses locating in Hyderabad ( Microsoft etc). I am worried that the hen that lays the golden egg – Hyderabad in this case – is caught between the warring political factions, and if it is not handled with the right perspective – protecting the reputation for it’s stellar IT role, and the outsized economic contributions it makes. Do these nuts get it? Why are they acting so irresponsibly?

    On the other side – I do see positives of smaller states, and self-governance. But not at the expense of the progress made in the state, and in the city.

17. Smaller states are better governed eg: Gujarat, Kerala, Himachal Pradesh. They score higher on most indexes.

18. Given the current nation-state ideology prevalent in the world, I actually find it really surprising that there has not been MORE groups campaigning to become a separate country than there are now (such as Kashmir, etc). Instead, it seems more important for many of the cultural and/or linguistic groups to have their own state status within the country of India.

    Yes it can be surprising to outsiders. There are several causes for our cohesion in diversity (cant call it Unity)

    1. Indians, especially from the Central to South have greater mercentile traditions and almost non-existent martial traditions. I for one feel good that we have a near 500 year gap between self rule – it leaves a vacuum that is filled by National identification and the closest arousing affect of a positive nature with a historical pov is the Hindu Itihaas, which is shared by much of the Hindu majority. The Marathis are a good indicator of how a martial past not too far removed from the present can fan seperatist ideas. But they are an exception.

    2. Hinduism: Bengalis for instance make up the largest constituent population of pilgrims to hill states of Uttaranchal and Himachal. Every Hindu Northerner who visits Maharashtra MUST go to Shirdi.

    3. The threat of political Islam: Unfortunate but true. As long as there is a Pakistan, Indians will stick together. The Hindus have a deep mistrust (as noted by Al Beruni) and even a psychosis of political Islam.

    4. Economic opportunities: regional elites (not the petty elites) understand the advantages of scale and size in a globalized world and they are the ones who drive policy by proxy in a shady, consensus based democracy.

19. However, during the BJP’s five years in power it did create three new states in northern India.

    This point is important. The demand for a separate state in Telengana predated these three new states, yet Telengana is not a reality. The reason, I think, is that it difficult to sustain Telengana’s economy without contact with coastal Andhra. Telengana is not able to derive any benefit from the Godavari because the terrain does not lend itself to irrigation projects.

20. Kumar wrote : “Economic reasons – Rayalaseema and North Andhra are more backward than Telangana.”

    Telangana is very much a backward and neglected region of Andhra Pradesh. I do agree that most of the politicians that have emerged in the Telangana region are corrupt and are in this for their own gain. Telangana has been neglected not only by the Andhraites, but also Telangana’s own corrupt politicians.

    Also, I know of several students who have participated in these protests that are not “Maoists, student wings of BJP, CPM and CPI, and hired goons from Rayalaseema” as Kumar stated. Although, there are students who may be “maoists” or part of the student wings of the various political parties, there are many others including faculty members from Osmania and Kakatiya Universities that have been crucial in these protests.

    I do not agree with Kumar saying that we are culturally and linguistically the same. It is known that Telangana has a unique cultural and linguistic identity. Cultural and linguistic differences, and mainly the economic neglect that the Telangana region has faced has led up to this moment.

    I do agree that if Telangana emerges as a separate state (which will not happen for a while anyway), Hyderabad should be left as a Union Territory. To force Hyderabad to join Telangana will set Hyderabad many years back in terms of economic development. Hyderabad has developed a unique cosmopolitan culture and is an economic force in India. This must be maintained. If it joins Telangana, there will be an economic backlash in Hyderabad.

    As far as the issue of a separate Telangana state succeeding in the future, I think that really depends on the younger leaders that have emerged in these protests. I think most people in the Telangana region realize that their politicians are corrupt and greedy. But I think the movement is more than just about a separate state; it is about the hope for a better future for the Telangana people who have long been neglected. With a separate state, they can at least HOPE for a better future.

21. With a separate state, they can at least HOPE for a better future.

    I’m not seeing how these two are related at all. If you know the pols are corrupt, how is further concentrating the corruption into a single, more parochial state going to make anything better?

    It is known that Telangana has a unique cultural and linguistic identity.

    Historically we’re all Andhra people. The only unique thing is that one group was ruled by the Nizam and another was under the Madras Presidency (I think) at the time of independence. There are dialectic differences, but trying to say that makes us different people is tenuous. Brits can identify where someone is within 20 Km just by their accents. Does that mean every London neighborhood constitutes a different group of people or just a bunch of the same people who talk a little bit differently?

22. Isn’t it possible that acceding to these statehood movements in India might lead to a further weakening of an already weak central government?

    I don’t see how. If anything, this will only weaken the states further and concentrate more power in the hands of the Center. The more futile arguments that can be stirred up between states, the happier Delhi is. Divide and Rule 2.0.

23. If anything, this will only weaken the states further and concentrate more power in the hands of the Center. The more futile arguments that can be stirred up between states, the happier Delhi is. Divide and Rule 2.0.

    On one hand. On the other hand, more factions in play means more veto players hamstringing and gridlocking the state.

24. Generally speaking though, I feel like it would be better to respect and understand a cultural and/or linguistic groups needs, because if a group begins to feel unrecognized or ignored in such a large multicultural/linguistic country, it would be much easier for them to lean towards the direction of their own separate nation-state to serve their needs (as they see them) rather than simply their own state within the country.

    Thats a humanist pov, but if they come in conflict with the law that has been drafted to protect the interests and property of the vested elites they are going to be stamped out by the state. Elites form a consensus based on economic interests and Elites are just elites – to draw in that old communist narrative, pigs, irrespective of their linguistic/regional ingroups and outgroups that only make for good political expedients in this wired world. I grew up in a pretty rabid circle of ULFA sympathizers. Then I got educated in Bengal and moved to Bangalore>USA>Pune, brought property in Mohali. Now would this pig like Khalistanis blowing up stuff around Mohali and bringing down the property prices. Hell no, bring in the KPS Gill. I am softer on ULFA but can only reconcile to hypocrisy to such an extent. Economic opportunity is the way forward for India and subsumes all.

25. Sir,One needs to consider this issue from three ways. First,the administrative benefits of creating a new state.Second,the voice,the need and the sentiments of the Regional Public and Lastly,the Constitutional Issues and the role of the Union Govt.The First point,I do feel that people of Telangana will get batter access to govt if the state is created.From several years,they have no effective voice reaching to the Hyderabad,leading to the backwardness of the region.Second Issue,the voice of the Region’s public.Its very clear and unanimous will for their own state.The recent movement has participations from all the classes of socity.They have come out on Road without fearing of The Police and atrocities.They have shown the unanimity.It would be shameful and undemocretic for the Congress party if it bows to the influential Reddys of Andhra and doesnt allow a new state to be created.Chandrashekar Rao has been able to win the hearts of the people and he must swear in as the first Chief Minister of Telangana having its capital city at Hyderabad itself.The last issue of the Role of the union govt.We all know that it is the same party who committed atrocities in 1969 is back in power at centre.This party is habitual of ignoring and smashing movements with the use of force.1969 killings were same as of the Tainamann Square killings.So,there is a reason to doubt if the present political alliance would allow it to happen.

26. ” 10 · Yoga Fire on December 10, 2009 12:11 PM · Direct link

    India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily.
    

    I like this standard where any state that doesn’t conform to the European ideal of being ethno-linguistically homogenous is “arbitrary.” How is it any more arbitrary than saying Alsace and Lorraine belong to France rather than Germany? Or randomly putting half of Prussia in Poland for no reason other than the fact that the Allies didn’t like the idea of Prussians running Germany? Or what about Spain’s oft forgotten Catalan and Basque speakers? Why is Portugal it’s own country and they aren’t?

    National borders get drawn and they’re always arbitrary to some extent. India is no exception in this. “

    Yoga fire, you, as usual, take my meaning completely wrong. Stop ‘reading between the lines’ when there was nothing meant between the lines.

    Bottom line: Europe as been reorganized more or less along “nation state” lines (mostly through war, not saying that this is GOOD or BAD, just saying it ‘is’).

    I meant that India was unified arbitrarily in terms of the ‘nation-state’ model because it’s not like India was a single unified nation that the British took over, ruled and then left, it was a bunch of small kingdoms and countries that had a changing unity over time, the concept of “India” as a nation as we know it today didn’t really exist. It is one of the arbitrary things Britain did (like many colonizers the world over) just group together an area under their rule for their convenience rather than from any kind of precedent set before.

    Again, I am not placing any JUDGMENT on any of these things– merely stating that the idea of the ‘nation-state’ is prevalent in modern times– I am not arguing for or against it. So please, as usual, don’t make my words insinuate something they do not.

27. As for “economic opportunity,” the only opportunities being extended here are for more corruption and graft to yet another parochial vote-bank.

    I am not very aware of the recent politics of AP. But ‘smaller states = better govt/more economic opportunity’ has been true in India in the last decade. To claim otherwise would be to put opinion before data!

    Take the case of Chhatisgarh, which was carved out of MP. It is a resource-rich, but poverty-ridden tribal area. While in MP, the distance from Bhopal factor held everything back. Nagpur in neighbouring Maharashtra (incidentally the centre for the separate Vidarbha movement) or even Kolkata, a few states away, was probably much better accessible than the capital in Bhopal or say the high court in Jabalpur. In the still pretty tightly controlled Indian economic environment sheer distance from the controlling center matters a whole lot. A decade after separation, you just have to drive on any of the roads criss-crossing the CG-MP border and experience the variation in pothole density to see the difference in growth rates of the two states.

    I am not claiming that corruption and graft has not gone up. CG is still home to Bastar, Naxalites, the Binayak Sen episode and the highest farmer suicide rate in the country. But at least it is local and exposing it or fighting it is now much easier for local people and media.

28. One last clarification– when I am talking about the ‘nation-state’ — there are two aspects of it:

    1.) What’s really going on.

    2.) How people THINK about what’s going on.

    Now in Europe, as you say, there are smaller cultural and linguistic groups thrust into countries at random, that doesn’t necessarily fit with the ‘nation-state’ model, but over all, the countries follow the pattern of ‘nation-state’ and also espouse that ideology as the ‘correct’ way to make a country. Hence they see themselves as following the model (which of course is varied in real life) and also the ‘nation-state’ model is generally seen as the ideal model to espouse is in era. (Again, I am not forming my own opinion)

    In that sense, partition and also the demand for a separate Kashmir, can be seen as an espousal of the ‘nation-state’ ideology. Additionally, attempts to create Indian states based along various cultural/linguistic lines since independence could also be seen as an espousal of the same.

    Hope that clarifies my point.

29. I think those, like me, who belong to the ethinc subgroup the “Gujus” should get their own state too.

30. Abhi, don’t you Guju’s already have your own state? 😉

31. India, on the other hand, was unified under British rule, and arbitrarily.

    Au contraire, Indian integration was and remains an Indian project. The proposals for the transfer of power favored letting each state decide if it would join India, until Congress leaders put an end to the plan. If it was not for Patel and Menon, we’d be dealing with 500+ independent states in present day India.

    the separation of Pakistan and Bangladesh were an attempt to make the region more nation-state based

    But Caroe’s plan for Pakistan was in service of protecting Middle East oil from India.

32. Abhi, don’t you Guju’s already have your own state? 😉

    Edison?

33. Au contraire, Indian integration was and remains an Indian project

    Yeah, I’m glad you said that. Linzi, I took what you said just like Yoga Fire…it was a purposeful effort that created India, however arbitrary the Brits decided things, I think. But I’ve also read quite a bit, where the notion of some country of Hindus existed for a long time, with boundaries similar to the India of today….it could have split up, as Portugal and Spain, Germany and parts of Poland, Austria and Hungary, but like many nation-states today, the boundaries, when receiving Independence were thought out…like many of the countries that formed in Europe. Many parts of Europe were conquered and in some ways colonized by former European or the Ottoman Empire…the present day boundaries of Europe required the active negotiation (often wars and oppression and nationalist movements, that included language or culture) by the people who occupy the countries.

34. Do you support the creation of Telangana? Isn’t it possible that acceding to these statehood movements in India might lead to a further weakening of an already weak central government? Also, do you think these movements might feed a sense of monoculturalist ‘separateness’ that could make the region a less inviting place for people from different ethno-linguistic backgrounds who happen to live there

    Why, that reminds me of a prompt for a final exam or research paper. How professorial! 🙂

35. Trust Manju to come up with #29!

36. Yoga Fire – First of all, historically, the people of AP share one common element (among others) – language. AP was created out of this common linguistic base. I said Telangana has a unique identity culturally and linguistically speaking which is not the same as the Andhra region. I did not say the people of Telangana do not speak telugu – they speak a different dialect, which is not the same dialect as those from non-Telangana regions. It does not mean the language is diffent. I meant to convey that the dialects are different and the Telangana dialect is completely unique to its region.

    There are more differences than just being ruled by the Nizams versus the Madras Presidency. The Telangana region does have cultural differences from those in non-Telangana regions. Whether its festivals, rituals, etc, there are some things that are not celebrated/done in the Telangana region that may be not conducted in non-Telangana regions and vice versa. I’m not saying that either one is superior (just wanted to say this in case someone interprets it that way, that I don’t think either culture or dialect is superior to the other). So, yes, there are common elements linguistically and culturally, but there are also differences. It does not make Telanganaites and Andhraites completely different from each other, which is what you seem to have interpreted. I only said the Telangana region has a unique cultural and linguistic identity, maybe I should be more clear: this identity does share common elements with the Andhra region, but to say they are the same (as in identical) is not true. Hence, the word, UNIQUE.

    But apart from all these factors, the neglect in terms of development that the Telangana people have faced is the main reason for this movement. There are other factors involved which one may or may not consider important (culture, language, even cuisine!), but the neglect, in terms of the development (economic and other things) of the Telangana region, is the most important factor for this movement.

    Politicians and hope – with a separate Telangana state, the politicans would be directly responsible for the people of this separate state. The Telangana people would have direct access to a government that would be formed on the basis for the betterment and representation of the problems and issues of the Telangana people. For too long, Telangana politicans have used excuses for not being able to get proper representation for Telangana. Well, now, if a separate state emerges, they cannot use those excuses. Which is why I said, the Telangana people can at least HOPE for a better future. It is not a guarantee that things will get better, but there is at least that hope, which had almost disappeared in recent years. The problems and issues of the Telangana people have been neglected. If and when a separate state emerges, these problems would at least be at the forefront and would have to be addressed to some extent at least.

37. It is sort of a cultural/linguistic issue, as others have said. Telugu is spoken in Telangana as in Andhra and Rayalseema, but the dialect is different. My understanding of the situation is that people from Telangana feel undermined by Andhras and feel that their part of the state is neglected, although I’m not sure creating a new state will fix their economic/political woes. As a Hyderabadi who is 1/4 from Andhra and 1/4 from Rayalseema (and half Malyali), my opinion is that the state shouldn’t be split up, period. (Although as an American perhaps I’m not really entitled to that opinion). However if it is to happen, I don’t like the idea of Hyderabad becoming part of Telangana. Hyderabad has its own distinct language and culture and doesn’t really belong with a state whose creation is based on hair-splitting when it comes to identity; the identity of Hyderabad is that it is a pluralistic, inclusive society, a microcosm of the ideal of India if you will (a history of terrible communal violence notwithstanding). I realized when this happened that not only do I still have an emotional connection to Indian politics, but when it comes to identity as an Indian I’m a Hyderabadi above all else.

38. Why, that reminds me of a prompt for a final exam or research paper. How professorial! 🙂

    Hey, it’s that time of year. I’m up to my ears in grading, which makes it all the more tempting to do blog posts on Sepia Mutiny.

39. what’s the scalability of indian states? uttar pradesh would be one of the most populous nations in the world, right below the united states.

40. Here’s to Mr. Kumar (The guy who knows in and out about Telangana’s economic and political position) and those who are against Telangana seperation.

    1. to Mr Kumar’s statement of Andhra and Rayalaseema are more backward than Telangana. Please see the statistics before you state that. Even now a person who owns 10 acres of land in Andhra is way more richer than a person who owns 40 acres of land in Telangana. That is because no Irrigation projects were undertaken by the govt at any time in these 50 years. Seems like Mr Kumar is comparing Andhra to hyderabad.

    2. Even, I do feel that Hyderabad must be a union territory rather than combining it with Telangana. At the same time, even if Hyderabad belongs to Telangana, the seperation of state is justified. Because, if hyderabad goes to Telangana, only few rich people or well settled people from Andhra may get affected. But the seperation would lead to lakhs of poor farmers, weavers and people of rural region of Telangana.

    3. It may be true that KCR and other politicians are fighting for their own profits, but this agitation was just ignited by him. The agitaion was carried on by the intelluctual students who are pursuing Ph.D of OSmania University (The No. 1 RANKED UNIVERSITY IN AP). and professors of OU and KU, journalists, farmers, Singhareni Employees, Govt emloyees, APSRTC Telangana unions, Lawyers, and the list goes on. (And yeah Mr. Kumar, these were all hired by Politicians or YS Jagan to destabilize the state. How senseless is that man?)

    Please see the following Video Clips before you take any decision.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkivNybmZac http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKmyTgT0kSo&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_aZ1VXo6hE&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXeEk5Nn53s&feature=related

41. I find some of these extremely funny. Every area will def. have its dialect and slightly traditional diff…. that isnt a reason for separation. if ppl feel neglected or feel the need for a separate state it is diff. but it is being done for a man who hardly has people’s mandate is downright stupid.

42. Now Telangana, tomorrow would be Vidarbha, next it would be a separate state for coorg/ coorgis in Karnataka. Aren’t we going against the very principle India stands upon? Wonder what we are getting into?

    I thought being Indian was first and mostly the only thing that mattered, not creating 20 new states. The very thought is disturbing.

43. I am from Hyderabad (born and brought up there).I have been educated in schools and colleges in hyderabad.Did my engg in Bangalore.Masters in US and currently in US. People always want special privileges based on caste,creed,religion,backwardness (not only in India,but in US,looking at the backlash against H1-B’s and others). My observations: Natives want settlers to go away,so that they can enjoy the benefits of their land forever, even if they don’t put the necessary effort (hard work,education) Note:Not pinpointing anybody, just an observation People like blaming others for their problems (people from other regions,politicians,government, their neighbor,US,better educated individuals,riche people,etc). There are places in telangana which are really bad.similarly there are places in andhra and every country in the world that are in bad shape and undeveloped. Political leaders from telangana have been the chief ministers for the state of andhra pradesh many times.They did not do anything for telangana according to general consensus. Hyderabad is in telangana and as all of us know is a melting pot of cultures,that has been a great success.

    A new IIT has been put up in Medak, which is in telangana.Of late a lot of changes have happened and are happening in Telangana.Several development projects have been initiated and some abandoned.

    Hyderabad (which is in telangana) has a BIT,IIIT,ISB and an excellent international airport.It is one of the top most IT hubs in India and the world.It has several engineering colleges and has had excellent growth. (since it allowed people from everywhere to excel,hyderabad has excelled,you can compare it with other places in telangana which have people only from telangana,and will know whom to blame for backwardness)

    Some important aspects of the current crisis: After the former CM, the late YSR died in a helicopter crash, the new CM seems to have been running into a lot of issues.He is not as strong (healthwise (around 75 years of age) and politically) compared to YSR.

    YSR had an ironhand on the administration and was a really strong CM. K.Chandrasekhara Rao (KCR) the TRS leader who has played a major role for the seperation of Telangana was a former Telugu Desam Party(TDP) member(another political party in Andhra Pradesh).Since he wasn’t given a minister position long back when TDP was in power, he raised the issue of seperate telangana once again(several attempts were made for seperate telangana long back since AP was formed,all of them unsuccessful).He formed a new political party Telangana Rajya Samithi (TRS) and moved in the direction of splitting the state.If anybody has read his comments or speeches published in the newspapers, you can feel his anger towards people from coastal andhra.He usually uses a threatening tone,asking them to pack their bags and get out of hyderabad and other regions of telangana.He doesn’t want them to own property or make money,since it deprives people from telangana to do the same.He usually repeated the same tone against the settlers (andhra’s) in most of his speeches (just like someone in mumbai,but hasn’t reached that level of violence yet). Before the previous general elections, he gave an ultimatum to YSR and congress party members that he would bury them alive in those elections.Alas people thought otherwise and KCR’s party lost miserabley.He resigned for his post as the head honcho of his party,but was forced to continue by its members.He kept quiet for a while,since YSR was at helm and waited for his chance.YSR died and KCR drinks red bull and announces a peaceful fast to death aka gandhiji (the difference is KCR’s followers created havoc in the city destroying property and scaring people, so much for peace). Another funny incident was when he started his fasting,he broke it immediately(may be realized he won’t get the necessary support and would have to die without any political gain).Factions in teleangana were disgruntled and everybody started hurling abuses at him,then he changes his mind suddenly and continues fasting saying he never broke it,looking at the gaining momentum(clever turnaround ain’t it).

    Again the rumour was that since KCR was a heavy drinker (heavy means really heavyyyyyy), he was given a strict ultmatum by the doctors that he wouldn’t survive long because of his drinking habits,so he decided to use his death as a ploy to attain seperate telangana.Gain would be: he would become Telangana’s Father,TRS would be the king maker party and his son,son-in-law and entire family will enjoy the fruits of newly formed telangana forever.

    Added to all this is telangana residents dislike/hate against andhras.Maybe because they are more successful or may be because they are more educated or may be because they don’t speak their version of telugu or maybe they did something really bad (i don’t know seriously what they did to piss them off so bad).

    The reason given by them is that: Although rivers Krishna and Godavari flow through telangana, they haven’t been used for the development of telangana.Big dams like the nagarjuna sagar dama and krishna barrage have been constructed to help the andhra region. The political leaders say that since Telangana region is at a higher altitude and andhra at a lower, it would be risky to construct any dams at higher altitude,thus the utility for andhra. Remember that the majority Chief ministers of AP have been from telangana,so maybe we can trust them on this(can’t say for sure).

    So in essence ,my 2 cents on this: Better developed andhra region in the eyes of the telangana people Belief that telangana must belong to them and nobody else Belief that they have been undeveloped for ever because andhra people stopped them from developing. Belief that throwing out all andhra people out of hyderabad will make their lives better.

    Please note:I am from hyderabad and believe that educated,hard working and entrepreneurial people who don’t blame others will succeed anywhere in the world.

44. How much more compartmentalization does India really need? This is slippery slope towards near-tribalism; much like post-Soviet eastern Europe continues to experience. The central gov’t must do more besides skim kickbacks and rubber stamp if they expect to remain relevant for much longer.

45. Here’s to Mr. Kumar (The guy who knows in and out about Telangana’s economic and political position) and those who are against Telangana seperation.

    1. to Mr Kumar’s statement of Andhra and Rayalaseema are more backward than Telangana. Please see the statistics before you state that. Even now a person who owns 10 acres of land in Andhra is way more richer than a person who owns 40 acres of land in Telangana. That is because no Irrigation projects were undertaken by the govt at any time in these 50 years. Seems like Mr Kumar is comparing Andhra to hyderabad.

    2. Even, I do feel that Hyderabad must be a union territory rather than combining it with Telangana. At the same time, even if Hyderabad belongs to Telangana, the seperation of state is justified. Because, if hyderabad goes to Telangana, only few rich people or well settled people from Andhra may get affected. But the seperation would lead to lakhs of poor farmers, weavers and people of rural region of Telangana.

    3. It may be true that KCR and other politicians are fighting for their own profits, but this agitation was just ignited by him. The agitaion was carried on by the intelluctual students who are pursuing Ph.D of OSmania University (The No. 1 RANKED UNIVERSITY IN AP). and professors of OU and KU, journalists, farmers, Singhareni Employees, Govt emloyees, APSRTC Telangana unions, Lawyers, and the list goes on. (And yeah Mr. Kumar, these were all hired by Politicians or YS Jagan to destabilize the state. How senseless is that man?)

46. I can say its totaly a wrong decession of congress government. You can not take a big decession under pressure.When a person sits for a fasting and few other people arround him support him you can not divide a state.

                     Till now every one in Andhra are thinking that Hyderabad is there capital and they have invested lot of money. Even State government invested lot of money in developing hyderabd. Where did all this money came from ? This money is from all the people of Andhra Pradesh .....
    
                     Is India a completley developed country? In each and every state there will be some places which may not be up to the mark ...... may be due to different reasons. 
    
      So will the the total 36 states ( if i'm not rong) will become 72 in future.
    

47. “So, yes, there are common elements linguistically and culturally, but there are also differences. It does not make Telanganaites and Andhraites completely different from each other, which is what you seem to have interpreted. I only said the Telangana region has a unique cultural and linguistic identity, maybe I should be more clear: this identity does share common elements with the Andhra region, but to say they are the same (as in identical) is not true. Hence, the word, UNIQUE.”

    I don’t think anyone can deny that there are slight differences here and there, but this is really as hairsplitting as it can possibly get. Identity grievances have reached a ridiculous point where you have people who essentially share the same food, dress, language, and religion can’t live together…

    The economic deprivation arguments are one thing and I suppose Rayalaseema can play the same game if it wants. But let’s call a spade a spade on this cultural identity BS, these great “cultural differences” are based on what? Celebrating Bonalu/Batukamma, a slightly different take on murukku, and some liberal borrowings from urdu and marathi are enough to be completely distinct?

    At this rate, let’s just go all the way and have Rayalaseema become a new state as well. That way the land my mom has in tirupati will escalate in value since it would be the new state capital.

48. The idea of Telangana being culturally different from Coastal Andhra is a red herring. Every state has sub-sections with slightly different cultures and traditions. If Telangana is worthy of its state then shouldn’t Kutch, Tulu Nadu, Vidarbha, Konkan etc be independent states as well?

    One of the main reasons that Telangana is less developed than the rest of the states has to do with the Nizam of Hyderabad’s governance (or lack there of). At independence, the Nizam was the richest man in the world while his subjects remained impoverished. Infrastructure was poor and many rural areas lacked basic educational facilities. Urdu was the required language for higher learning as opposed to English. Meanwhile, Coastal Andhra benefited from good governance and infrastructure. In addition, English was much more prevalent. Many of the best universities in AP are still in Coastal Andhra (Guntur, Vishakapantam etc).

    My father grew up in Telangana and for as long as he could remember, Coastal Andhra was always wealthier and more educated then Telangana.

    Overall, I am very ambivalent about the split. I think Telangana needs better governance, not necessary its own state. In addition, there’s no guarantee that the TRS (or whoever comes in) will be able to manage Telangana any better than any of the previous AP governments.

49. To everyone arguing about my post where I wrote about what the cultural differences are between people of Telangana and Andhra: it was only a response to the original blog poster’s question of, are there any other factors?

    Second, in my comment, I wrote “but the neglect, in terms of the development (economic and other things) of the Telangana region, is the most important factor for this movement.”

    Separation solely on the basis of cultural and linguistic differences is absolutely ridiculous. I agree with this as well. But once again, as I stated earlier, these are only factors that have added to the main reason of the movement: the neglect the Telangana region has faced in terms of the development of the region.

50. Like many a commenter, I am also from Hyderabad (born and brought up for the first 20 years of my life) . My parents migrated from coastal Andhra (Praksam) and still have close ties to the region.

    Economic opportunities , linguistic and cultural identity are repeatedly mentioned by the some posts for a seperate state.

    Travel in coastal Andhra , and you will notice the various dialects within Andhra. You can go from Guntur to Prakasam and see difference in the way people talk. My cousins in Guntur make fun of the Telugu spoken by my cousins from Ongole.

    I do not have any specific numbers for median per-capita income of each region. But, I doubt that the discrepancies are as big as they are made out to be. Especially after the tech revolution.