Dealing with political adversities is not new to the Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee (APCC) president and state cabinet minister Botcha Satyanarayana. The proposed division of the state gives him an opportunity to further enlarge his political role in the new state of Andhra. However, it all depends on how he handles the transition turmoil in his present role and on staying ahead of the competing forces in representing the fears and aspirations of the Andhra people in due course. In an interview with B Dasarath Reddy, Satyanarayana speaks his mind on issues centred around the decision to create a separate statehood for Telangana. Edited excerpts:
How do you view the ongoing political turmoil involving the resignations of your own party members and of other political parties from coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema (Seemandhra) against the state bifurcation?
The decision was taken after 10 years of political and administrative exercise at the Central level. We have to abide by the decision of the party high command. Yet, the people of Seemandhra have some genuine concerns about the state bifurcation. For instance, there has been a fear that they may not get river water to irrigate their lands.They fear losing access to Hyderabad, because the city alone generates over 60 per cent of employment opportunities in private sector in the state. Hyderabad is a hub for industries, health care infrastructure, information technology, research and education and is a part of Telangana. That is the reason why Seemandhra people are asking for the rollback of the decision if possible and adequate safeguards in the event of the division.
Because there was a long pending demand for a separate Telangana. The political agitations built around this demand grew over time to a level where even the coastal Andhra leaders felt that the issue must be resolved to put an end to this political uncertainty. Once, I myself said what was wrong in having two states for Telugu speaking people. The Congress agreed to divide the state only after all the other major political parties, including the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), had favoured separate statehood during the consultations held on four different occasions, some, as you know, even included this demand in their election manifestos.
Moreover, all the political parties and the successive chief ministers termed Telangana as a backward region to reap political benefits in this region. Over a period, it had become an accepted fact, though there was no hard truth in the claim except that the chief ministers from Telangana were fewer and stayed in the office for a fewer period of time in five and a half decades of history.
How can you justify the resignations of your own party legislators and MPs when your own leadership was instrumental in giving effect to the state bifurcation?
This question should be posed to the YSR Congress and the TDP, whose legislators and MPs have actually started this drama of resignations even though their leadership favoured the state bifurcation. Further, these two parties are instigating the violent agitations against the state bifurcation from behind the curtains. The statues of Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, who were responsible for the creation and preservation of Andhra Pradesh state, were being targeted in coastal Andhra. However, the statues of YSR (former chief minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy) who did send a delegation of 40 MLAs to Soniaji (Congress President Sonia Gandhi) in 2000 with a demand for a separate Telangana were left untouched. Our party leaders are only reflecting the sentiments of the people as it happened even during the Telangana agitation. I am talking to my party MLAs on their resignations.
Do you think coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions are the net losers in this exercise? What about the natural and economic resources available in coastal Andhra region and not in Telangana?
I agree that we have abundant resources for our future prosperity. But it will take time, may be even decades, to provide similar opportunities of growth to people. And all that can only happen if a strong and visionary leader presides over the new state. It is equally important to ensure that large central public sector industries set up operations in backward regions within Seemandhra, so that ancillary industries grow around these units. We also need central funds for building a capital and other infrastructure. That is a different issue. Our concerns are largely of immediate nature, jobs, water, education, etc.
How are you going to address these issues?
We will request, beg and fight for the protection of the rights and interests of the people of the coastal Andhra and Ralayaseema regions. Our general secretary Digvijaya Singh had already said they are going to constitute a committee to look into the issues and concerns of Seemandhra people. We want clarity on many issues. For example, Bachawat Award on inter-state water disputes indicated that the interests of those who already using the water resources for irrigation should be given priority while deciding the allocations. Four districts of the Krishna basin will face a real threat since there are four reservoirs already built on the Krishna river; two in the upper reaches in AP and two in Karnataka. We need to know if that is going to be honoured. About 32 villages of the Bhadrachalam division, a part of Telangana, have to be merged with coastal Andhra to ensure the construction of the Polavaram irrigation project.
Seemandhra comprises both prosperous and backward areas. What kind of lessons do you draw from the present political turmoil?
The biggest lesson is that no Hyderabad-like situation should ever be created. A new concept is now being discussed all over the country. The policy makers should adopt a scattered development model instead of setting up all facilities and infrastructure at one place in the name of a capital. I favour this idea. Industries should be encouraged to come in backward areas in the region. Institutions and other facilities should be located at different places so that the opportunities and the connectivity develops all across the regions.
Where do you prefer the location of the new capital of Seemandhra?
The talk of a capital is not relevant at this juncture. But I would prefer that a decision on this has to be a collective one.
How do you view the ongoing political turmoil involving the resignations of your own party members and of other political parties from coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema (Seemandhra) against the state bifurcation?
The decision was taken after 10 years of political and administrative exercise at the Central level. We have to abide by the decision of the party high command. Yet, the people of Seemandhra have some genuine concerns about the state bifurcation. For instance, there has been a fear that they may not get river water to irrigate their lands.They fear losing access to Hyderabad, because the city alone generates over 60 per cent of employment opportunities in private sector in the state. Hyderabad is a hub for industries, health care infrastructure, information technology, research and education and is a part of Telangana. That is the reason why Seemandhra people are asking for the rollback of the decision if possible and adequate safeguards in the event of the division.
More From This Section
Then why did the Congress take a decision in favour of state bifurcation in the first place?
Because there was a long pending demand for a separate Telangana. The political agitations built around this demand grew over time to a level where even the coastal Andhra leaders felt that the issue must be resolved to put an end to this political uncertainty. Once, I myself said what was wrong in having two states for Telugu speaking people. The Congress agreed to divide the state only after all the other major political parties, including the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), had favoured separate statehood during the consultations held on four different occasions, some, as you know, even included this demand in their election manifestos.
Moreover, all the political parties and the successive chief ministers termed Telangana as a backward region to reap political benefits in this region. Over a period, it had become an accepted fact, though there was no hard truth in the claim except that the chief ministers from Telangana were fewer and stayed in the office for a fewer period of time in five and a half decades of history.
How can you justify the resignations of your own party legislators and MPs when your own leadership was instrumental in giving effect to the state bifurcation?
This question should be posed to the YSR Congress and the TDP, whose legislators and MPs have actually started this drama of resignations even though their leadership favoured the state bifurcation. Further, these two parties are instigating the violent agitations against the state bifurcation from behind the curtains. The statues of Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, who were responsible for the creation and preservation of Andhra Pradesh state, were being targeted in coastal Andhra. However, the statues of YSR (former chief minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy) who did send a delegation of 40 MLAs to Soniaji (Congress President Sonia Gandhi) in 2000 with a demand for a separate Telangana were left untouched. Our party leaders are only reflecting the sentiments of the people as it happened even during the Telangana agitation. I am talking to my party MLAs on their resignations.
Do you think coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions are the net losers in this exercise? What about the natural and economic resources available in coastal Andhra region and not in Telangana?
I agree that we have abundant resources for our future prosperity. But it will take time, may be even decades, to provide similar opportunities of growth to people. And all that can only happen if a strong and visionary leader presides over the new state. It is equally important to ensure that large central public sector industries set up operations in backward regions within Seemandhra, so that ancillary industries grow around these units. We also need central funds for building a capital and other infrastructure. That is a different issue. Our concerns are largely of immediate nature, jobs, water, education, etc.
How are you going to address these issues?
We will request, beg and fight for the protection of the rights and interests of the people of the coastal Andhra and Ralayaseema regions. Our general secretary Digvijaya Singh had already said they are going to constitute a committee to look into the issues and concerns of Seemandhra people. We want clarity on many issues. For example, Bachawat Award on inter-state water disputes indicated that the interests of those who already using the water resources for irrigation should be given priority while deciding the allocations. Four districts of the Krishna basin will face a real threat since there are four reservoirs already built on the Krishna river; two in the upper reaches in AP and two in Karnataka. We need to know if that is going to be honoured. About 32 villages of the Bhadrachalam division, a part of Telangana, have to be merged with coastal Andhra to ensure the construction of the Polavaram irrigation project.
Seemandhra comprises both prosperous and backward areas. What kind of lessons do you draw from the present political turmoil?
The biggest lesson is that no Hyderabad-like situation should ever be created. A new concept is now being discussed all over the country. The policy makers should adopt a scattered development model instead of setting up all facilities and infrastructure at one place in the name of a capital. I favour this idea. Industries should be encouraged to come in backward areas in the region. Institutions and other facilities should be located at different places so that the opportunities and the connectivity develops all across the regions.
Where do you prefer the location of the new capital of Seemandhra?
The talk of a capital is not relevant at this juncture. But I would prefer that a decision on this has to be a collective one.