With the division of AP, the two states’, security response system will have to be looked into given the Maoist threat.
Security experts say AP will face more problems as it will not have the police infrastructure at par with Hyderabad. However, two smaller states are easier to mange than one big state.
Special Protection Group founder director Dr S. Subramanian finds it easy to manage smaller states like Haryana from the law and order point of view as forces can be rushed to any corner of the state in no time; whereas in larger states like Uttar Pradesh, it is difficult to manage. “It is easier to manage smaller states due to their size, easy to gather inputs and intelligence. Andhra Pradesh was a big state and with bifurcation, the area has relatively become smaller and it enables security forces to pay more attention.”
Crowds protest against the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh in Anantapur district. — AFP
About the Maoist threat, he says that Telangana has had a Naxal problem from the very beginning and it had nothing to do with the state’s division. “The Naxal menace was due to the oppressive feudal system in Telangana. It borders Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh forests which are Naxal affected. They can easily come into Adilabad and Khammam districts. The Agency areas in Andhra Pradesh also have this problem. Naxalism will increase in both areas. It’s all about political will to control it. It also depends on the unemployment rate. If investments are pulled out of Hyderabad, it may lead to unemployment.”
Former director-general of Sashastra Seema Bal, M.V. Krishna Rao, agrees that smaller states will not pose security challenges.
un-Supported Media
Maoists at a training camp in Andhra Pradesh. — AFP
“By chronology, Telan-gana may be the 29th state but by size it will be among the top 15. It is bigger than England. Telangana has been historically different. This bifurcation may not lead to serious demands for statehood across the country. Vidarbha is a fairly big area and majority of the people are Hindi speaking. The demand may grow for historical reasons but not in the case of other demands.”
“If at all there is a Maoist issue, it will be more in the Andhra-Odisha Border area. Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, Srikakulam and East Godavari are vulnerable. The Centre should invest more money and develop a mechanism. Above all, Maoists in this country cannot topple the Indian State like Mao did (in China). The Indian state is far more matured.”
Former director-general of police Swaranjit Sen says, “With too much fragmentation, the Centre won’t be able to do more on this and states have to rise. Small states like Uttara-khand, which do not have problems continue to have no problems. States like Jharkhand and Chhattis-garh, which had a Maoist menace continue to have it.
“It will take some time to restructure the response system. The available resources have to be divided. We have to wait and see how these states share intelligence with the same seriousness they are doing now. The Maoist threat will be more focused after separation.”
