The prominent issue in recent days has been that Chief Ministers of both Telangana and Andhra Pradesh were in New Delhi to discuss the long pending water sharing problem. The Central government also has cooperated in this regard.

The fact of the matter is that this crucial issue cannot be resolved without any constructive dialogue. Water cannot be manufactured. Hence, the responsibility lies on all of us to protect natural resources like water. While on the one hand, water quantity in Krishna river is low, a large quantity of water from Godavari river is flowing to the ocean, which is nothing but wasting the precious natural resource. When there are heavy rains, more than 5000 TMC waters are being wasted as they flow into the ocean. During normal rains, 500-800 TMC waters are being flown into the ocean.

It is these waters that we all must protect by coming up with a mechanism that is acceptable by both states.

One should note that even during the days of the united Andhra Pradesh there were water disputes; the bifurcation has seen an increase of the disputes. Attempts are being made to provoke people by taking advantage of the regional sentiment. According to our estimate surplus waters will be around 2000TMC and the two states require a mere 200-300 TMC s of water. Both the chief ministers can sit together and solve the problem. This can be more effective if the meeting sees the participation of an experts committee.

The decision must be taken within a month given that such a sentimental issue should not be prolonged any longer for a multitude of reasons.

Our proposal in this regard is that statistics and facts and figures must be finalised by both sides on how many TMCs each wants to utilize. One should ascertain about the TMC each can utilize.

Factors like how many projects can be constructed in Telangana in the future and how much water is required for that and waters, including those flowing into the ocean, should be considered. Naturally low-lying areas like Andhra Pradesh will have rights over surplus waters. Andhra Pradesh should also factor in the new projects that are in the pipeline. Both should be the approximate proposals vis-à-vis TMC required and how much will flow into the ocean. These measures will help in determining the TMCs required by each state. There should be a finality as regards this. If projects are being constructed within mutually agreed upon limits, then nobody will have any objection. This will also help in an early solution to the thorny issue. Sentiments cannot solve problems of either state except that they will bolster the self-interests of certain politically motivated individuals.

If Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu proposes to construct Banakacharla project and Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy proposes another project without an estimation regarding net waters and surplus waters the dispute will remain as it has been over the years.

Towards this, the decision to appoint an experts committee is commendable. Many problems will come to the notice of the said committee, including the Kaleshwaram issue and other technical issues. The government of the day is not supposed to do a watchman’s duty. These issues can be resolved by both the central and state governments as it is not that difficult to reach a common understanding. The Communist Party of India (CPI) is also welcoming this decision.

Right from 1960, the CPI, spearheaded by Yeddula Eashwer Reddy, MP, and VK Adi Narayana Reddy, has been protesting and demanding Krishna waters to the famine-hit Rayalaseema region. We have also participated in several movements in this regard as students and youth leaders. At long last, a solution has been worked for the region.

Don’t provoke sentiments:

An unfortunate aspect has been that several attempts have been made to provoke the sentiments in both states. Sentiment is like instant coffee and brings temporary relief. When Y S Rajashekara Reddy passed away his son Jagan Mohan Reddy took advantage of this sentiment and became the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, albeit for one tenure.

The water sentiment was felt in the Telangana region upon the formation of Andhra Pradesh in 1956. This water sentiment was also the driving force for the separate Telangana movement on two separate occasions.

At present there is no Telangana sentiment. K Chandrasekhar Rao (KCR) is responsible for the gradual erosion of the Telangana sentiment. In his cabinet there were 12 persons who were opposed to Telangana statehood. It will be a good augury if the BRS resists from provoking the Telangana sentiment on every issue.

Revanth Reddy was a disciple of Chandrababu Naidu. That relationship is no more at present. Revanth Reddy has come out of the TDP and has become the Chief Minister of Telangana as a Congress leader. Allegations of BRS that Revanth Reddy’s continued relationship with Naidu was creating hurdles to Telangana, are nothing but foolhardy speculations.

Revanth Reddy is an elected Chief Minister and not a nominated one. Can it be possible to resort to injustice to Telangana and justify the cause of others? If the BRS wants to blame him, they can do so in any other way but not with this kind of blackmail politics. People from both states are closely observing this sentimental issue as even they want an early solution. The BRS leaders must realise that politicising the water dispute is tantamount to betraying one’s own mother.

In Andhra Pradesh, YSRCP leaders have been calling about the height of Polavaram project. They have agreed to lower the height by five metres. They should instead criticise the TDP and its anti-people’s policies but about the water dispute.

CPI has supported Jalayagnam, Polavaram and Kaleshwaram as well. This opportunity should be availed by both states to boost agriculture and augment drinking and irrigation water supply. CPI is supporting this better opportunity. On this issue nobody should be blackmailed. I have supported Rajashekar Reddy when he took up Jalayagnam project. In case of scams or scandals, we must fight against corruption but not against waters.

In the same manner certain politicians opposed construction of Polavaram project. We need water and we will always be in favour of water projects. We have supported parties which are in favour of projects. Even about Kaleshwaram, we have suggested that the fight should be against corruption and allow the construction of the project be completed. Its foundation was not laid properly. Political advisors have become non-technical advisors and hence this situation.

Prioritise completion of all pending projects:

In the matter of Banakacharla project, Chandrababu Naidu is taking an extreme step. He is talking frequently about it but is without completing the ongoing pending projects in famine-hit areas like Handhri-Neeva, Galeru-Nagari and Vamshadhaara (Uttaraandhra). Moreover, he is stating that out of the total expenditure on the project contractors, the central government, the state government and the World Bank will each bear 25 per cent of the overall cost. I wonder if this is possible. If construction of highways is given to contractors, they will collect money through toll gates. Likewise, projects are given to contractors, they will start selling water.

As a seasoned politician, Naidu should have first and foremost consulted Revanth Reddy and others and not take unilateral decisions as regards water sharing. That is the reason why such opposition has risen.

(The writer is the National Secretary of CPI)