Splitting UP not a bad idea
AVINASH K. MISHRA
Mayawati rightly invoked Ambedkar, who had mooted small States for
administrative, not parochial, reasons.
In her latest move proposing the splitting of Uttar Pradesh (UP) into
four states — what is being seen by some as a political masterstroke
ahead of elections to the State assembly early next year — the Chief
Minister (CM), Ms Mayawati, invoked Dr B. R. Ambedkar. The Dalit icon
and architect of India's Constitution, she claimed, was in favour of
smaller States.
It is worthwhile, therefore, to actually look at what Dr. Ambedkar's
views exactly were on the subject, and to what extent they match Ms
Mayawati's proposals. It turns out that her Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP)
Government's resolution to reorganise the State into four smaller
parts — namely, Poorvanchal with 28 districts of eastern UP, Paschim
Pradesh with 17 districts of western UP, Bundelkhand with seven
districts adjoining Madhya Pradesh, and Avadh with the remaining 23
districts in central UP — were pretty much in line with Dr Ambedkar's
views of a reorganised India, detailed in his book, Thoughts on
Linguistic States.
Of course, it can be argued that even if this is true, Ms Mayawati's
action is a mere political gimmick, aimed mainly at the forthcoming
Assembly elections. But that again ignores the fact that she had
raised this issue even earlier in 2007, just after becoming Chief
Minister, and has been consistently doing so during the years. At a
rally in Lucknow in October 2007, Ms Mayawati called for a three-way
split of UP into Bundelkhand, Harit Pradesh and Poorvanchal Pradesh,
which, she said, would help in improving the quality of life by making
governance feasible in the backward areas of the State. She promised
that her Government would pass a resolution in the Assembly, while
seeking the Centre's approval in this regard (as required under
Article 3 of the Constitution). In the same year, she wrote to the
Prime Minister urging him to allow the proposed reorganisation, which
she reiterated in March 2008, and again in December 2009, when the
issue of Telangana became hot and shook up the national political
establishment.
AMBEDKAR'S VISION
Coming back to Dr. Ambedkar, after Independence, the circumstances in
the country favoured only a few territorial and functional
arrangements of decentralisation. The decentralisation arrangements
adopted soon proved inadequate. It was at that critical juncture that
Dr. Ambedkar showed how linguistic reorganisation of the States of the
Indian Union was possible, while, at the same time, rising above
narrow and parochial considerations and imbibing a universal and
cosmopolitan vision.
In his book — written in December 1955, just a year before he died —
Dr Ambedkar proposed division of Madhya Pradesh (into two), Bihar
(into two) and UP (into three: West, Central and East with their
respective capitals at Meerut, Kanpur and Allahabad). Moreover, he
advocated a special status for Bombay (as separate 'City State') and
Hyderabad (which, he felt, should become the country's 'second
capital' in view of it being "equidistant from all parts of India" and
also a cultural melting pot that would "remove tension between the
North and the South").
Dr Ambedkar's proposals definitely factored in linguistic
considerations. However, for him, it was not an end in itself.
Reorganising States based on common language was useful only if it met
the requirements of efficient administration and here it helped if a
State was built on "a feeling of a corporate sentiment of oneness,
which makes those who are charged with it feel that they are kith and
kin". But these were only to make governance easy and not for
promoting provincialism and narrow parochialism.
Also, one had to take into account aspirations and sentiments of the
people in different areas, even within a common linguistically
organised State. Not for nothing, then, did the idea of merging the
Andhra State and Hyderabad State (Telangana) into one not even occur
to Dr Ambedkar, despite both being Telugu-speaking regions.
Unfortunately, Dr Ambedkar's views — radical for that time and also
for today — remained out of mainstream public discourse, as the
country's governing class opted for increasing centralisation of
powers under the influence of powerful corporate interests.
Nevertheless, what Ambedkar spoke nearly half a century ago, has
proven to be prophetic: The demand for a separate Telangana never
dies, MP and Bihar have been divided on the lines that he propounded,
and the demand for creation of new states from UP has only gained
traction with Ms Mayawati's latest so-called gimmick.
UP PROPOSAL NOT NEW
In fact, way back in 1972, 14 MLAs in UP — which was then ruled by the
Congress under Mr Kamalapati Tripathi — moved a resolution for the
creation of three new states (Braj Pradesh, Awadh Pradesh and Purbi
Pradesh). It failed, apparently because the Congress leadership at the
Centre didn't want a State where Muslims made up more than a quarter
of the population, right under its nose. There are suggestions now of
the Bharatiya Janata Party generating the same suspicions regarding Ms
Mayawati's proposals.
Since 1972, Uttar Pradesh has had no CM besides Ms Mayawati, who has
ruled for a full five years. She is also the first, in a long time, to
have formed a Government with a clear majority. In that sense, seeking
a break-up of UP may seem somewhat counter-intuitive. But that makes
it all the more daring a venture.
One might probably link this to Ms Mayawati's own upbringing: Like Dr
Ambedkar, who grew up in Mumbai, she too has her roots in city life in
Delhi. That has made her less of a provincial politician with overt
emotional attachment to the idea of a unified UP. Nor has she been
keen on cultivating any particular pocketborough within the State (a
la Mulayam Singh Yadav in Etawa-Mainpuri or Ajit Singh in the western
UP Jat belt).
This relatively cosmopolitan outlook explains her audacious and
unapologetic support for splitting UP into four, akin to Dr Ambedkar's
proposal in 1955 to divide Maharashtra into three (four, including the
'City State' of Bombay).
(The author teaches Political Science at RLAE College, University of
Delhi. The views are personal.)
(This article was published on November 17, 2011)
------------------------------------
----
INFORMATION OVERLOAD?
Get all ZESTCaste mails sent out in a span of 24 hours in a single mail. Subscribe to the daily digest version by sending a blank mail to ZESTMedia-digest@yahoogroups.com, OR, if you have a Yahoo! Id, change your settings at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/join/
PARTICIPATE:-
On this list you can share caste news, discuss caste issues and network with like-minded anti-caste people from across India and the world. Just write to zestcaste@yahoogroups.com
TELL FRIENDS TO SIGN UP:-
If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTCaste by sending a blank mail to ZESTCaste-subscribe@yahoogroups.com OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, by visiting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join/
Also have a look at our sister list, ZESTMedia: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
ZESTCaste-digest@yahoogroups.com
ZESTCaste-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ZESTCaste-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment