De facto power is already with the states. Regional parties can now make or break central governments. This is no bad thing. An artificial centralisation of power took place under long years of Congress rule in the mistaken belief that only a strong Centre could ensure a strong country.

Delhi grew larger than life, India's size and diversity were forgotten as a subcontinent became a one-city country. The Congress, based on one-family rule, was able to narrow the power base of India around itself, and the capital is where the Nehru-Gandhis stayed. They were helped by the communists who because of dogmatic ideologybelieved in centralised control.

The BJP, with its reliance on allies who are state parties, has changed the political landscape. The allies feel they have a major say in the running of the Government in Delhi, an involvement that was never there because of the uneven relationship during the Congress years. Chief Ministers waited patiently in R.K. Dhawan's room in Parliament House to meet Mrs Gandhi.

Sometimes other callers were ushered in first. Mrs Gandhi, according to her mood and the importance to her of the Congress Chief Minister, often let him stand like a peon in front of her. And if their lot was really down they were lucky to get a nod from even Dhawan. To gauge Mrs Gandhi's feelings one had to look deep into Dhawan's eyes. Curtness became a hallmark of the Gandhi women, a tradition unfortunately carried on by Sonia Gandhi.

What a refreshing contrast Delhi is today. Alliance leaders are received by Chief Ministers or other BJP dignitaries. They are given utmost respect by the Prime Minister,business is conducted with delicate diplomacy. Whatever its imperatives, the BJP has ushered in a new political style where the regional leader is a colleague rather than a satrap. The diplomacy of coalition politics makes international diplomacy look like child's play.

Nuances are gauged, strength judged and bargaining conducted with subtle dexterity. India's political style could only be this way: feudalism has a relevance when a diverse society seeks equality. As every country is equal in international law, so every state is equal in the country. A raucous style would lead to fissures more easily than quiet structured elegance.

The myth of unity was carried to ridiculous lengths by the Congress and the communists. It was as if only those in Delhi could ensure the nation's unity and those in the states were less Indian. The Gandhis were good at these games. It is surprising that the bubble has taken so long to burst. The more power centres there are the better for India because stake in its successwill be for many rather than for a few. It is a Western myth that a split verdict necessarily means a weak country. What is required is unity of purpose. Coalitions lead to cohesion, a cementing that centralised rule cannot provide, as the erstwhile Soviet Union showed.

The old Indian unitary state is gone. In its place come several centres of `power, all autonomous, all important and quite Indian. Only a rightist party which respects regionalism could work in a mutually beneficial relationship with the parties of the states. The communists have never tolerated autonomy nor could dynasties. Cooperation not coercion is the pattern of the future.

In this context the BJP will have to examine the role of Governors. The institution was a British creation which symbolised the paramountcy of viceregal rule in a non-democratic system. The Governor needs to be a link between Centre and state. But it must be someone the states can work with. A system of getting the consent of the state to the name proposed by theCentre as in the case of ambassadors is highly desirable. The Governor must fit into the evolving political culture and not stick out like a sore thumb.

Indian diversity is more akin to Europe than America. Each Indian state with its cultural, ethnic and linguistic distinctiveness is like a European nation though the present federal structure is weaker than in the United States. Indian diversity should never be anchored to Delhi. Each state should be allowed freedom to develop according to its own genius within a broad agreed national framework. Delhi has no moral or political right to question the Indianness of any state.

While the BJP Government must give greater autonomy to the states, the states have the responsibility to develop their regions. In the United States where there is fierce competition between states, and each one is placed in a hierarchy according to economic progress, there are at least 20 cities with facilities akin to those in New York. These include their own symphony orchestras,foreign-affairs councils, radio and TV channels, local newspapers and a host of other prestigious projects.

In how many cities in India can one exchange ideas on foreign policy? Everyone wants to run to Delhi to get recognition. Calcutta, Mumbai and Madras inherited institutions from the British but standards have declined. The Asiatic Society in Calcutta, one of the oldest in the world, literally gathers dust as Marxist and other unions battle it out. The National Library in Calcutta has seen better times and the National Museum in Delhi is slowly overtaking the grand Indian Museum in Calcutta. Partly this is because of the central Government's efforts to put all its golden eggs in Delhi but also because the states do not have the confidence to develop their own institutions. There cannot be just political decentralisation, it must be matched with responsibility by state governments to produce the best. This requires self confidence by the state leadership. What is the use of greater autonomy if there areto be ramshackle towns with few civic amenities, no infrastructure and bad roads all over India?

The BJP Government's decentralisation must be matched with a commitment by the states to develop. If the states want to be taken seriously they must show a commitment to their regions. Only then will political autonomy mean more than winning elections. Votes after all are only pieces of paper unless they means modernity, progress and selfless national enlightenment.