Opinion View from the right: Telangana divide

While the Organiser editorial describes the development as a “scandalously successful division of Andhra” by the Congress, the full-page article “At last Telangana”, in Panchjanya, almost equates the bifurcation of Andhra with Partition: “after the Partition of the country… this could probably be the second event that has divided the hearts of the people of a state so much”.

Both weeklies underline the BJP’s support to Telangana. The Organiser says that the saffron party’s stand “snuffed out the hopes of Telangana opponents”, whether TDP chief N. Chandrababu Naidu or YSR Congress chief Jaganmohan Reddy or the Congress’s own Seemandhra rebels: the “benefit of this may not accrue to the party immediately”, expressing the hope that it will help the BJP eventually. “Politically for [the] BJP, consistent advocacy of statehood of Telangana and support for the bill stemmed from the fact that it did not want to inherit the ‘mess’ created by the Congress. Increasingly confident of [a] majority on its own, [the] BJP did not bite the bullet,” says the article, claiming that the Congress, too, is going to be a net loser, since its losses in Seemandhra will far outstrip its gains in Telangana.

Pak-china Highway

The Panchjanya cover story raises concern over agreements signed between Pakistan and China during the Pakistani president’s recent visit to Beijing. The agreement is to construct the Pakistan-China Economic Corridor of 2,000 kilometres by road and rail link, connecting Kashgar in China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region to the Pakistani port of Gwadar. Highlighting that the corridor will pass through Gilgit-Baltistan, which “constitutionally and legally remains an integral part of India”, the article demands that the government come up with an appropriate response.

“Pakistan and China have hostile relations with India. India has fought wars against both, while tension prevails on the borders with both countries,” reminds the Panchjanya story and criticises the Indian government’s muted response to this agreement as “cowardly”.

Soaps, not Sops

An article in the Organiser criticises the interim budget, saying that the finance minister “juggles with figures” to “showcase the 10-year achievements of the UPA government by juggling numbers, which otherwise tell a different story when seen from the ground”. It criticises the provision of sops ahead of elections. “Instead of the aam aadmi, he [the FM] announced sops for the manufacturers — the corporate sector, notably in automobile, capital goods and mobile handsets,” says the article, voicing apprehensions that it is the manufacturers who will largely benefit, while the benefit to consumers remains to be seen.

The Organiser editorial suggests that these sops are an attempt to repackage Rahul Gandhi as a “fighting hero” for the common public just before the elections: “Starting with increased number of household cylinders, one rank-one pension for armed forces personnel, scandalously successful division of Andhra and reduced excise duty on consumer goods, everything was dramatically scripted to make the Gandhi scion… a fighting hero…” It suggests that the “Ordinance route to clear six anti-graft bills” is also part of the Congress script. “There is an urgent need for soaps that can clear the stains of the rotten system but what is offered are either electoral so(a)ps or soap operas,” laments the editorial.

Compiled by Ravish Tiwari