Political parties across the Andaman and Nicobar Islands must step back from rhetoric and allow a serious, informed debate on the future of higher education in the territory. Bandhs, protest calls and competitive political messaging may generate visibility, but they also disrupt normal life and deepen uncertainty among students and families already worried about their academic future. What the islands need at this stage is clarity, not confrontation.
At the same time, a difficult but necessary issue also needs to be acknowledged. A significant section of young people in the islands continues to view government employment as the most secure and desirable career path. While this outlook reflects historical realities, the state has long been the largest employer in the territory, it also limits economic possibilities. If higher education continues to be treated primarily as a stepping stone to competitive exams, the islands risk producing graduates without the skills required in a changing job market.
Any serious discussion on university reform must therefore go beyond institutional labels and address the type of education being delivered. The islands need greater emphasis on professional and skill-based courses, whether in tourism, logistics, marine sciences, environmental management, digital services or entrepreneurship. The local economy cannot expand unless the education system produces trained professionals rather than degree-holders waiting for vacancies.
This is why the current debate over university structure is important. For decades, higher education in the islands has functioned largely as an extension of mainland institutions, with limited academic autonomy or local relevance. The controversy now unfolding reflects not only confusion over administrative arrangements but also a deeper absence of long-term planning for the territory’s academic future.
There is a strong case for the islands eventually having their own university. However, the discussion cannot be reduced to symbolism. Any new institution must be academically credible, financially stable and integrated into the national higher education system. Without these safeguards, merely creating a university in name will not improve educational outcomes.
Concerns have also been raised about proposals involving a deemed-to-be university structure. Many students appear to have been led to believe that such a model automatically weakens degree recognition or academic prospects. That assumption is not supported by experience across the country. Several established institutions operate under the deemed framework, and their credibility depends not on the label but on governance standards, faculty strength, funding stability and regulatory oversight.
The central issue, therefore, is not whether an institution is called central, state or deemed. The real question is whether the proposed structure guarantees academic quality, financial security and national recognition. A weak statutory university can be less effective than a well-regulated deemed institution. Terminology alone does not determine outcomes.
The present public discussion in the islands has, unfortunately, moved toward slogans rather than substance. Rumours about degree validity, institutional downgrade or academic isolation have circulated widely, often without official clarification. Decisions that will affect generations of students cannot be shaped by speculation or political positioning.
A more transparent process is needed. The administration should clearly outline the model under consideration, the legal protections attached to it, the funding structure, and the mechanisms that will ensure recognition of degrees and faculty standards. At the same time, political parties and civil society groups should channel their concerns into structured consultations rather than street-level escalation.
In the long run, the islands require an institution that reflects their distinct needs, one that studies island ecology, supports maritime and tourism sectors, builds local human capital and contributes to India’s strategic presence in the region. Achieving that goal will require careful design rather than hurried decisions.
The debate over university structure should therefore focus on outcomes, not optics. The question before the islands is not simply whether they should have their own university. It is whether they can build one that genuinely prepares students for a broader economic future beyond government employment.
