Centre-state relations in India

In a country where states had for long been complaining of central authoritarianism, the reverse now seems to be true.

Foreign policy is a central subject in India, as in most other countries as well. The states do not have jurisdiction in determining India’s external relations. That is an area to be handled exclusively by the government at the centre. But given the steady rise of regional parties and the increasing dependence of governments in New Delhi on their state allies, the impact is being felt in the area of foreign policy as well. The decision by West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, to oppose the signing of the Teesta water accord between India and Bangladesh, at virtually the last moment, made headlines and mired Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Dhaka in deep controversy. By opting out, despite high-level efforts to persuade her, Ms Banerjee catapulted herself onto the centre stage of foreign policy in the making and went on to announce an expert committee to “review the entire situation”. By truncating the agreement singlehandedly, at great cost to India-Bangladesh relations, Ms Banerjee despite being just a state leader, has established herself as a player in bilateral relations between the two countries.

The Trinamool Congress was then actively supporting the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) coalition and the ruling Congress party was reluctant to offend her and risk a withdrawal of support. Minister for External Affairs Salman Khurshid has recently expressed hope that Ms Banerjee will be persuaded to give up her objections, even as leaders of the Congress party and Bangladesh have been wooing her to ensure that the accord is signed, at some point, later this year. In fact, Dhaka is spending more time on the chief minister of West Bengal regarding this issue than it is on the central government with regard to the Teesta water issue, creating an unprecedented situation for the ministry of external affairs.

The second instance, defying an early resolution, is the strong response of Tamil Nadu to worldwide reports of the annihilation of innocent Tamils in Sri Lanka’s military operations against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. The anger in Tamil Nadu compelled the two main parties, the ruling All-India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), to issue strong statements against Sri Lanka, urging New Delhi to treat that country as an unfriendly nation. This was just as the UPA government was heaving a sigh of relief at having “handled” the Sri Lankan situation through a policy of “neutrality”, whereby relations with the Rajapaksa government were maintained without adverse reaction from the Tamils in Sri Lanka, or for that matter, India. Large-scale protests across Tamil Nadu and statements by the state political parties, including Chief Minister Jayalalitha Jayaram, put a spoke in the works that have frozen relations completely. The UPA ally, DMK, has pulled out support.

The Tamil Nadu Assembly passed a strong resolution seeking a referendum for a separate Tamil Eelam, even as it urged New Delhi to stop treating Sri Lanka as a friendly country and slap economic sanctions against it. The situation became more bizarre with Sri Lanka reacting to the state resolution, describing it as “disturbing” and inviting all detractors to visit the country and see for themselves the progress on the ground. New Delhi was compelled to watch a diplomatic exchange between a state and a foreign country in silence. As if this was not enough, Tamil Nadu has trampled directly on the centre’s jurisdiction of allowing or disallowing foreigners, with a notice imposing a “ban” on all Sri Lankans from travelling to the state. A letter to this effect has been sent by the state chief minister to the prime minister, despite the fact that only the Union Home Ministry is authorised under the Constitution and the law to take such decisions.

In a country where the states had for long been complaining of central authoritarianism, the reverse now seems to be true. The pendulum of state-centre relations seems to be swinging towards the former, although the beginning is shaky, not very mature, and clearly too emotional for good governance. Two women chief ministers, Banerjee and Jayalalitha have, however, raised a red flag on foreign policy, leaving the dependent government at the centre virtually paralysed on the two respective issues of import. Public opinion within the state and the constituencies of the regional political parties appears to be favouring the state government’s actions, although in other parts of India there is visible dismay. But clearly, the two states have sent out powerful signals that need to be understood, factored in and incorporated into the larger mould of centre-state relations to prevent discord and tension within coalition governments in the future.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 13^th, 2013.