Answer:

The demand for smaller states in India has been a persistent issue in its political discourse. Proponents believe that smaller states can lead to improved governance, more equitable resource distribution, and better local representation. However, opponents caution against potential administrative costs, inter-state conflicts, and threats to national unity.

The Demand for Smaller States in Indian Politics:

• Historical Context: Calls for smaller states have deep historical roots, often linked to cultural or tribal identities.
  For example: The call for a separate Bodoland state in Assam, led by the Bodo ethnic group, stems from their unique cultural identity and desire for self-rule, aiming to rectify long-standing socio-political marginalisation.
• Regional Movements: Various regional movements have emerged, pushing for statehood to address local grievances.
  For example: The demand for Telangana, which resulted in its formation in 2014, stemmed from perceived neglect and underdevelopment.
• Administrative Efficiency: Proponents argue smaller states lead to better administration and governance.
  For example: The bifurcation of Uttar Pradesh aimed to improve governance by creating a more manageable administrative unit.
• Cultural Identity: Many demands are rooted in preserving distinct cultural and linguistic identities.
  For example: The movement for Gorkhaland focuses on the cultural identity of the Nepali-speaking Gorkha community in West Bengal.
• Economic Development: Advocates claim smaller states can better address local economic issues.
  For example: Chhattisgarh, formed in 2000, has seen significant industrial growth and development in its mineral-rich regions.

Arguments in Support of Smaller States:

• Better Governance: Smaller states can enhance governance by making administration more manageable and responsive.
  For example: Uttarakhand, formed in 2000, has been praised for its focused administrative efforts in mountainous regions.
• Resource Allocation: They can ensure more equitable distribution of resources and development projects.
  For example: Jharkhand, created in 2000, aimed to better manage its rich mineral resources for local benefit.
• Local Empowerment: Smaller states promote local participation and empower regional governance.
  For example: The creation of Telangana has led to greater political representation and involvement of locals in governance.
• Cultural Preservation: They help preserve and promote unique cultural and linguistic identities.
  For example: Nagaland was formed to protect the cultural identity of the Naga people and their traditional practices.
• Focused Development: Smaller states can tailor development strategies to local needs and conditions.
  For example: Sikkim has used its small size to focus on sustainable tourism and organic farming, setting national examples.

Arguments Against Smaller States:

• Higher Administrative Costs: Creating new states involves significant administrative costs and infrastructure development.
  For example: The formation of Telangana required substantial expenditure on setting up a new state capital and administrative machinery.
• Inter-State Disputes: Smaller states can lead to more inter-state disputes over resources and boundaries.
  For example: The bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh led to ongoing disputes over water sharing from the Krishna and Godavari rivers.
• Weakened National Unity: Fragmentation can potentially weaken national unity and foster regionalism.
  For instance: The persistent demands for Gorkhaland raise concerns about further fragmentation of West Bengal.
• Economic Viability: Some smaller states may struggle with economic self-sufficiency and sustainability.
  For instance: Himachal Pradesh faces challenges in generating sufficient revenue due to limited industrialization.
• Resource Distribution: Smaller states might exacerbate regional imbalances and inequalities.
  For example: Goa, despite its high per capita income, struggles with equitable resource distribution to its rural areas.

The creation of smaller states can enhance governance, resource distribution, and cultural preservation, but also bring risks of higher administrative costs, inter-state disputes, and regional imbalances. Contemporary demands for new states, such as Bhil Pradesh, require a careful, case-by-case analysis, balancing local aspirations with national interests. An informed and  participatory approach is essential for such significant decisions, ensuring they contribute positively to India’s unity and development.

DOWNLOAD PDF