On the Decision to Divide Andhra Pradesh
(Resolution adopted by CPI(M) Andhra Pradesh state committee at its meeting held in Hyderabad on August 3, 2013)
After procrastinating for more than three and half years, the Congress leadership has finally declared its decision to bifurcate the state. It got the approval of its partners in UPA. The process of division, it stated, would be completed within four months. A situation has arisen that division of the state is inevitable as both Congress and BJP, who together command a big majority in parliament, have come out in favour of division of the state.
On December 9, 2009, the then union home minister P Chidambaram had announced that the process for formation of Telangana state would be initiated. Within twenty days, he made a ‘U’ turn and made another statement on December 23 going back from the decision to divide the state. Since then, the Congress leadership has been dragging its feet from resolving the dispute, citing lame excuses. It prolonged the uncertainty in the name of Srikrishna Committee, all party meetings, wider consultations, evolving consensus etc. The entire state was pushed into uncertainty. Administration virtually came to a standstill. Development in the state was hampered. Behind its readiness to divide the state three and half years ago or its present announcement of decision to divide the state, lies the selfish electoral interests of the Congress.
The BJP aims at formation of a number of smaller states through which the federal character of the country is weakened, which would then enable the BJP to implement its ‘Hindutva’ agenda. The strategy of BJP is to instigate communal rift and clashes through which it wants to grow stronger. Through the division of the state, it wants to gain in AP where it has all along been unable to make a dent. Therefore, the communal danger of BJP is going to be a challenge before the secular forces in the state. It is necessary that Left and democratic forces in the state and a section of people recognise this danger.
The ruling and main opposition parties in the state, viz, Congress, TDP and YSRCP took opportunistic positions on the issue of division of the state. While the Congress, which is holding reins of power at the centre as well as in the state, created the problem and dillydallied without resolving it, both TDP as well as YSRCP complicated the issue by not taking clear-cut stand. The leaders of these three parties took different stands in different regions and stoked tensions and disunity among people of different regions. As a result, a situation has arisen in which discontent, agitation and unrest are unavoidable in whichever way the decision is taken.
Before the announcement of the decision to divide the state, severe agitations took place in Telangana region, while after such an announcement it is the turn of ‘Seema-Andhra’ now. The TRS president, who, time and again issued statements that roused passions and hatred among people, is resorting to the same tactics even now. The developments of the last three and half years have once again proved that the sentiments and aspirations of the people would be used by the bourgeois ruling parties to serve their own selfish interests.
The CPI(M), from the beginning, has been making its stand clear that it stands in favour of a united state, in tune with the policy of ‘linguistic states’. It maintained distance from the rival agitations in both regions which were supported by opportunistic bourgeois parties. It organised agitations on pressing issues of the people that were totally ignored by the government as well as the ruling parties during this period.
In the coming four months, there would be many more problems related to the division of the state. Bourgeois leaders would instigate hatred and raise new disputes and emotions and sentiments. The CPI(M) would strive to protect the unity of the common people without succumbing to narrow, parochial sentiments. On issues like protection of employment, distribution of resources, steps to develop backward regions, protection of poor and downtrodden, the CPI(M) would strive to ensure that the union government would render equitable justice.
All the political parties, when in power in the united state, have followed neo-liberal policies. Even after division, the same policies would continue to be pursued irrespective of which party of ruling classes assume power in either of the states. The backward and oppressed people would not gain any thing, but the rulers will take advantage of their positions in power to accumulate their wealth. Even in the past, the ruling parties did not resolve the problems of people. Nor they would do so now after the division of the state. The CPI(M) has been consistently championing the cause of workers, peasants, and socially and economically backward sections. Even after the division of the state, it has to continue to do so.
Due to the implementation of policies of liberalisation, regional disparities have increased. Even after the division of the state into two, due to implementation of the same policies of liberalisation by the parties that would govern the two states, the regional disparities will increase. Therefore, the CPI(M) will have to struggle for implementation of a special plan for the improvement of the backward regions and for comprehensive development.
To resolve the issues of people and to build unity among the Left and democratic forces for unleashing struggles, the CPI(M) would stand in the forefront.