01-24-2008, 08:57 AM
Good thread to start. However, this state reorganization is imminent with Congress and BJP together are also in this bandwagon with the sub regional forces.
It is easy to say that small states will be good for governance. it may be true and may be not. We cannot simply go on divide them. There are some historical factors behind them. Strategically also it is a diasaster. More so if the smaller states are in the borders. If this is really true then why US did not divide all its states to the size of Delaware. Why they have populous and large states like California, Texas and NY?
Consider the division of JK to J, K and Ladakh as proposed by RSS sometime back. The K is forcefully glued because of J and Ladakh in many situations. By dividing you are removing the glue. When India is strong milatarily and economically, it is no big deal. There will be times when there could be economic disasters and we might be in a situation like Indonesia. it gave up East Timor as it could not fight for it.
Similarly think of southern Tamilnadu. If that becomes a state on its own there will be another state like Kerala with about 35% of EJised population in the mould of another 30% macualites. This small state will now provide political power to EJs. So far they are not having direct political power. What if when India is not doing good, this state conspires with LTTE and want a seperate Tamiz country? People get weird ideas at weird times. Why should we even allow such a situation?
Church is the main hurdle in Nagaland to remove the Article 370 of that state and also the seperatist movements there. It is a small state in the border. No need to mention Mizoram with 60 assembly seats.
Eventhough I hate to see seperate Telangana (it might be inevitable as things stand these days), I am more than angry to see UP being divided. UP is the heart of Indian politics. It is going through a bad phase due to lack of unifying leadership. By dividing important states like UP, Bihar, Maha etc, there will be a situation when you will not be able find a single leader with reasonable support around whom rest of the folks can rally around.
I hated Jharkand and see the miserable state of Bihar's economy as most of the economic powerhouse went to Jharkand. In Jharkand there are already two governments in one term and they are talking of a third one.
See the Goa situation. There was never a term with one stable government. I don't need to talk about NE states. They don't even have sufficent acronyms to name their coalition formations that form on an yearly basis.
Imagine a situation where we have 200 parties and each getting <4 seats each in a parliamentary election. If there are large states atleast there will be only 50 parties with few of them getting 70 to 80 seats with a capability to negotiate and form a government.
The real guys who are behind smaller states are Maoists, EJs and many international anti-Indian NGOs. BJP is falling for this small states policy without a clear thinking.
Congress never allowed this during Indira or Rajiv. Indira just made successive CMs from Telangana region to ward of state divison. Rajiv went to the extent of hill council creations and not seperate states. Currently we have Italian congress and this party has no India interests and hence they are implementing the divisive agenda of EJs and maoists.
The locals who think of political power are just selfish and narrow minded with no vision. Their greed and local emotions are being whipped by these divisive forces.
When BJP had this as stated policy in the 90s, the things were not this bad and it has to revise its stated policy and it is not trying to revert its policy.
It is easy to say that small states will be good for governance. it may be true and may be not. We cannot simply go on divide them. There are some historical factors behind them. Strategically also it is a diasaster. More so if the smaller states are in the borders. If this is really true then why US did not divide all its states to the size of Delaware. Why they have populous and large states like California, Texas and NY?
Consider the division of JK to J, K and Ladakh as proposed by RSS sometime back. The K is forcefully glued because of J and Ladakh in many situations. By dividing you are removing the glue. When India is strong milatarily and economically, it is no big deal. There will be times when there could be economic disasters and we might be in a situation like Indonesia. it gave up East Timor as it could not fight for it.
Similarly think of southern Tamilnadu. If that becomes a state on its own there will be another state like Kerala with about 35% of EJised population in the mould of another 30% macualites. This small state will now provide political power to EJs. So far they are not having direct political power. What if when India is not doing good, this state conspires with LTTE and want a seperate Tamiz country? People get weird ideas at weird times. Why should we even allow such a situation?
Church is the main hurdle in Nagaland to remove the Article 370 of that state and also the seperatist movements there. It is a small state in the border. No need to mention Mizoram with 60 assembly seats.
Eventhough I hate to see seperate Telangana (it might be inevitable as things stand these days), I am more than angry to see UP being divided. UP is the heart of Indian politics. It is going through a bad phase due to lack of unifying leadership. By dividing important states like UP, Bihar, Maha etc, there will be a situation when you will not be able find a single leader with reasonable support around whom rest of the folks can rally around.
I hated Jharkand and see the miserable state of Bihar's economy as most of the economic powerhouse went to Jharkand. In Jharkand there are already two governments in one term and they are talking of a third one.
See the Goa situation. There was never a term with one stable government. I don't need to talk about NE states. They don't even have sufficent acronyms to name their coalition formations that form on an yearly basis.
Imagine a situation where we have 200 parties and each getting <4 seats each in a parliamentary election. If there are large states atleast there will be only 50 parties with few of them getting 70 to 80 seats with a capability to negotiate and form a government.
The real guys who are behind smaller states are Maoists, EJs and many international anti-Indian NGOs. BJP is falling for this small states policy without a clear thinking.
Congress never allowed this during Indira or Rajiv. Indira just made successive CMs from Telangana region to ward of state divison. Rajiv went to the extent of hill council creations and not seperate states. Currently we have Italian congress and this party has no India interests and hence they are implementing the divisive agenda of EJs and maoists.
The locals who think of political power are just selfish and narrow minded with no vision. Their greed and local emotions are being whipped by these divisive forces.
When BJP had this as stated policy in the 90s, the things were not this bad and it has to revise its stated policy and it is not trying to revert its policy.