Paddy advisory turns political heat on Cong amid water fears in Telangana | Hyderabad News

Hyderabad: Telangana govt’s appeal to farmers to avoid paddy cultivation during the upcoming Yasangi season has evolved from an agricultural advisory into a political test of its credibility on water management. As opposition parties question whether the govt adequately planned for emerging water constraints, political observers say the controversy could shape public perceptions of Congress’s governance and potentially influence the state’s political landscape.The debate recalls political scientist Paul Richard Brass’s theory on the political uses of crisis, which argues that the consequences of a crisis are determined not only by the event itself but also by how govts respond, how the public perceives that response and how rivals seek to assign blame.Brass developed the framework while examining the 1966-67 Bihar famine, when drought and crop failures triggered widespread hardship. His study focused not merely on the famine causes but on the political struggle over how serious the crisis was, whether the govt responded effectively, if relief reached those affected and who should be held accountable.Political analyst S Ramakrishna said the Telangana govt’s paddy advisory fits into a similar dynamic. “In Telangana, the paddy advisory could become a political liability for Congress if farmers view it as a sign of poor preparation. Conversely, a convincing explanation, credible water management and sustained support for farmers could help the govt defend its position,” he said.Congress argues that farmers must gradually move away from water-intensive paddy cultivation because of shrinking water availability. Opposition parties, however, contend that the controversy raises larger questions about whether available water resources have been managed effectively.Ramakrishna said the political impact of the issue on Congress cannot be ruled out. Depending on how successfully the ruling party addresses criticism, it could even influence the timing and atmosphere surrounding local body and GHMC elections.Drawing a historical parallel, he recalled how drought and agrarian distress figured prominently in the political environment preceding the defeat of the Telugu Desam Party in united Andhra Pradesh in 2004. While the present circumstances are different, he noted that farm distress has often carried political consequences for ruling govts.BRS has accused the Congress govt of failing to utilise available waters of the Godavari and Krishna rivers, alleging that significant quantities flowed downstream unutilised. Congress has countered by pointing to shortcomings in irrigation infrastructure inherited from the previous BRS regime. BJP, too, has questioned the govt’s preparedness to tackle water scarcity.The competing narratives underscore how political parties attempt to shape public understanding of a crisis. Yet farmer organisations argue that the issue goes beyond partisan politics and reflects a longstanding failure to build resilience against recurring droughts, floods and weather-related disruptions.Ravi Kanneganti of Rythu Swarajya Vedika said neither BRS nor Congress had developed a systematic strategy to manage such challenges. “Govts should plan for such situations during normal years instead of responding only when a crisis emerges,” he said.Ravi also noted that the previous BRS govt had similarly advised farmers against cultivating paddy during Yasangi in 2021. The recurrence of such appeals, he argued, highlights the absence of a long-term crop planning strategy aligned with water availability.Congress leader and Rythu Commission member S Anvesh Reddy, however, rejected criticism that the government acted late. He said farmers had been informed since the beginning of the year about the need to shift towards alternative crops and that seeds had already been supplied to facilitate the transition.For Congress, the immediate challenge is to persuade farmers that the advisory is a necessary response to emerging water realities rather than evidence of inadequate planning. For farmers, however, the concerns are more immediate: whether alternative crops will generate adequate returns, whether markets will be available and whether the govt will provide meaningful support during the transition.“The real issue for farmers is whether alternative crops will be remunerative and whether adequate support systems are in place,” said Ch Chaitanya, political observer. This is where the political debate may ultimately be decided, not in arguments between parties, but in how farmers judge the govt’s response in the months ahead.