Assessing the justness of the demand is not easy. It has to be agreed that, as said by the Telangana advocates, Andhra Pradesh is a sprawling state and it can sometimes be difficult for a government to have a careful and even watch everywhere. Statistical details of the politics of Andhra Pradesh point out that the imbalance in governance may not be a hollow claim. In the 53 years of Andhra Pradesh’s existence as a state, there have been 15 chief ministers. It indicates the unstable political atmosphere that has prevailed in the state over a period of time. The state has had 4 chief ministers than would have been normally necessitated by constitutional demands, which is an election once in five years. Another point to look out for here is that 10 out of these 15 chief ministers have come from the non-Telengana regions of Andhra Pradesh, i.e. Rayalseema and coastal Andhra Pradesh. The last chief minister from the Telangana region was in power as far back as 1990. While the dominance of chief ministers from the non-Telangana regions does not prove that governance has been imbalanced, it still gives reason to believe that the claims of pro-Telangana activists are not hollow.

To understand this better, it is important to be aware of the history of Andhra Pradesh state. Formed in 1956 by the merger of the then Andhra state and the Telangana region of the Nizam’s dominion, Andhra Pradesh had faced voices of dissent right from the outset. Telangana was rather reluctantly merged with Andhra to give unified Andhra Pradesh. Even in the current protests, pro-Telangana activists have been actively pointing out the fact that Andhra Pradesh was never a united entity. According to them, there are a lot of cultural differences between Andhra and Telangana. They say that the history of 400 years of existence as a separate entity under the rule of Nizam, before independence, automatically grants them the right to demand a separate state. It can be said that the political and cultural arguments seem to favor Telangana as a state.

It does not end with just this. At present, Telangana accounts for 119 seats in the Andhra Pradesh assembly. That itself is enough to convince anyone that the state, if formed, is not going to be a tiny spot on the Indian map. Pro-Telangana activists claim that the state now envisioned is bigger than 17 existing states of the Indian republic. That also strengthens the geographical side of their demand for the state.

But, there is also a flip side to this story and that is brought about by the forces that are at present making the demand for the separate state. Though existing for over 50 years, the current steam for the movement has been provided by the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) and its leader K Chandrashekhar Rao’s (KCR) hunger strike. It would not be wrong to say that the center kind of buckled under the pressure created by this strike and related sporadic incidents of violence. The sudden announcement of procedures being initiated for the formation of a new state seemed to be made in undue haste. The suspicions have been ratified by the dissension that it generated within the Congress ranks itself.

The question to be asked here is, did the Congress, which has power at the center and in Andhra, present too meek a picture in the face of a strong decision that had to be taken? Were the protests by the KCR led TRS taken too seriously? Looking at the Andhra Pradesh assembly, it is clear that the TRS does not have a large vote share. As said above, the Telangana region accounts for 119 seats in the Andhra Pradesh assembly. In the Assembly elections conducted earlier this year, the TRS managed to win only 10. This means that the TRS represents less than 10% of the Telangana region. It would not be wrong to estimate that their total vote share would also fall somewhere around the 10% in the region. Therefore, protests led by the TRS must also be given only that much of importance. But, it seems that the government at the center allowed the TRS led protests to become a decisive factor in the Telangana issue. This move can be termed more populist and less constitutional. So, while the demand for Telangana and the reasons cited cannot be brushed aside only as regional sentiment, the acceleration of the process by a political outfit of very minor representation is not acceptable. The students’ protests at Osmania University are also not very convincing because the TRS does not hold a single seat in the Hyderabad district. The TDP led alliance, of which the TRS is a part, also does not boast of a big seat share in Hyderabad. So, the pieces do not add up to make a convincing picture!

While everyone has been talking of Telangana, the possibilities of a new state and the governing advantages, one facet that seems to have been ignored is the fate of Andhra Pradesh. It is important to think of what happens to Andhra Pradesh minus Telangana if and when the new state is formed. What implications will the bifurcation have on the new Andhra? The question becomes even more relevant because Telangana contains Hyderabad. Pro-Telangana activists have fiercely claimed that Hyderabad is theirs and that Andhra better start looking at other alternatives like Vizag or Vijayawada as their capital. This one point has huge consequences for Andhra. For over the past half a century or so, the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad have been the fulcrum around which the development of Andhra Pradesh has leveraged. The bulk of investments, be it in infrastructure, technology or education of Andhra Pradesh have been in these cities. It can be said beyond doubt that people and resources from all parts of the state, be it Telangana, Rayalseema or coastal Andhra Pradesh, have flown into these cities. So, separating them away one fine morning will be doing injustice to the people of Andhra and the work they have put in for all these decades. Besides the question of resources, it is also a question of identity. Hyderabad is the identity of Andhra Pradesh. Not many can deny that when they hear the name Andhra Pradesh, the first picture that crosses their mind is that of Hyderabad. Now, Andhra is set to lose that identity.

The whole anti-Andhra Pradesh bifurcation protests unraveling all along the coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema can be assumed to boil down to the issue of losing Hyderabad to Telengana. Amongst many things that Hyderabad will take with it, the most important seems to be the educational resources. Hyderabad is essentially the higher education hub of the whole of Andhra Pradesh. Some of the top universities of the state in Hyderabad and surrounding regions include Osmania, Jawaharlal Nehru Technical University (JNTU), Hyderabad Central University, International Institute of Information Technology (IIIT) and the recently opened IIT Medak. With the division of Andhra Pradesh, all these premiere institutions automatically go to Telangana. There are bound to be changes in reservation patterns and native candidates will definitely have a quota of the total seats. Whilst Telangana students are sure to benefit from this, it needs to be seen that the students from other parts of Andhra Pradesh don’t get the short end of the stick. Higher educational must be totally shielded from any affects of bifurcation.

More important is the economy. The bulk of Andhra Pradesh’s investments flow into Hyderabad. Almost everyone would have heard of the famed Hi-Tech City and all the IT giants that have their units in one long corridor. It would be unfair to Andhra Pradesh and the resources that have come in from every part of the state if all this is separated one fine morning because one man decided to go on a fast. This is perhaps where the idea of two separate states with Hyderabad as the common capital came into being. But, that is bound to give rise to more disputes than agreement over revenue sharing and other such issues.

Finally, the most important issue is going to be that of natural resources, especially water. Andhra Pradesh relies on the Krishna and Godavari rivers for its water requirements. Both rivers enter Andhra from Maharashtra, through the Telangana region, proceed to feed other regions of Andhra Pradesh and drain into the Bay of Bengal. It is imperative to make sure that the bifurcation of the states does not change any of the water supply or irrigation systems currently existing in a way that will deny Andhra of the waters of the Krishna and Godavari. The history of India is full of instances where neighboring states have been at sword over sharing of water resources and control of dams along borders. The Kerala-Tamil Nadu Mullaperiyar issue and the Karnataka-Tamil Nadu Kaveri issue are good examples.

It is extremely important that these matters, especially education, economy and water are thrashed out and settled well before the bifurcation process gets underway. That is the only way to ensure that the two states when ultimately formed will have no major disputes or issues which can fuel further angst and agitations. This is where the centre will have to play the Captain’s role and make the settlement possible.

But, before all that, it is important to know whether the formation of Telangana is really a dream of the people or merely a political stunt. The division of opinion on the formation of a new state is evident from scenes witnessed at the assembly and Lok Sabha. That the final word does not belong to the TRS is very clear and all other parties, especially the Congress are not willing to take a concrete stand, there is factionalism all over. In these circumstances, the bifurcation process cannot go ahead without ratifying the validity of the demand and the only way to do so is by asking the people. That the people of Telangana are not hell bent upon a new state is very clear from the rather bleak performance of TRS in the last elections. Therefore, the only way to assess their true wish at the current juncture would be a referendum. Yes, it has not been tried in India before, but Sweden with its four referendums over the last fifty years is a good model. In that country, referendums are held for matters as small as the change in traffic rules. Here, we have something much bigger. The people of Telangana would not have bargained for such big decisions when they voted during the last elections, they would have only wanted good governance. Because bifurcation is one thing that is going to change the identity of a huge population forever, it is only fair that the people themselves be asked to take the decision, by vote. That would be the only correct way of doing things. If the people deliver a two thirds majority on bifurcation, it would be then right for the centre to start thinking about the above mentioned issues and initiate Telangana formation. Any other way would only be haste.

On a finishing note, Telangana is an isolated issue. Over the last few days, synchronous appeals have shown up from various parts of India demanding statehood. Most of them do not have geographical or cultural feasibility. An eminent politician of Tamil Nadu was heard talking about the state being split into North and South. But gladly, the idea found no takers. The point is; division, partition or bifurcation is decisions that will change the lives of generations. They are not five year plans or employment schemes to be scrapped or restructured by a newly elected government. Such decisions need to be taken after the most careful consideration, which does not appear to be the case now. Telangana can happen, but only with the peoples’ consent and the center’s wise mediation. Let’s hope that the best comes out of this issue for the people of Telangana. Let’s also hope that good sense prevails upon the rest of the country, let there be no hasty and violent demands for independent states from almost every corner of our nation. There are more burning issues to attend to.