Subscribe to Desicritics
The Case for Telangana
Sujai
The people of Telangana have fought for creation of a new state for themselves for nearly 60 years now. This legitimate fight for creation of a new state with Hyderabad as its capital, within the legal confines of Indian Constitution, has had a voice since the time of Indian Independence.
In 1948, right after Indian Independence, the Indian Army entered the region to liberate the people of Telangana as part of Hyderabad State from the Nizam Rule. The newly formed Hyderabad State was a distinct entity in Indian Union and had its elections in 1953 prior to the formation of Andhra Pradesh in 1956.
Meanwhile, another region next to Telangana, called Andhra, was keen on fighting for a separate state for its people away from Tamil people. Fearing that most of the newly created jobs and opportunities would be taken up by Tamils since Tamils were more educated and had access to opportunities, and also citing the reasons that Andhras would not be well represented in Tamil dominated Madras Presidency, Andhra people started a protest. Potti Sriramulu of Andhra region went on a hunger strike in Madras for 58 days and died fighting for creation of a separate state out of Madras Presidency called Andhra State with Madras as its capital.
After his death, the Central Government in New Delhi conceded to his first demand, that of creation of Andhra State, but it rejected his other demand. Madras became capital of new Tamil State instead of Andhra State. Contrary to the widely spread misconception, Potti Sriramulu fought for political aspirations of Andhra people of Madras Presidency, not the Telangana people of Hyderabad State.
The Andhra People having lost Madras to Tamils looked for an alternative city for its capital and eyed the glorious city of Hyderabad. Using the slogan that Telugu is the binding factor for both the regions, they renewed their fight to include Telangana into their new dream of Vishalandhra. The People of Telangana had a different opinion - they didn't think it was a wise move. Telangana people were educated in Urdu under Nizam while the Andhra people were educated in Telugu and English under British. The new opportunities clearly gave preference to English and Telugu in the new India. During 1948-1952, though Hyderabad was a different state ruled by civil and administrators, there was heavy influx of Andhra people into Telangana to take up newly opening positions in the new India. Hyderabad city saw the first waves of protests against joining Andhra Pradesh in 1956.
But the prevailing mood in the country was already set for creation of states along linguistic lines. Potti Sri Ramulu's death and Andhra people's demand for creation of a state on linguistic basis led to creation of First State Reorganization Committee (SRC) in India. Though Nehru was averse to this idea, many new states got formed in India on the basis of language. Kerala and Karnataka got formed immediately. Telangana was clubbed with Andhra State to form new Andhra Pradesh though Fazal Ali of First SRC clearly expressed reservations against clubbing together the two regions that were unequal partners. In his recommendations he went on to say that Telangana could stay as separate state if the union of these regions did not work out.
To protect the interest of Telangana, that was recognized by everyone as one of the most backward and illiterate regions, where bonded labor and zamindari system was rampant, many 'Gentleman's Agreement' promises were made by leaders of Andhra to ensure that the new opportunities in Telangana go to Telangana people. Actually, there was already a system in place to take care of such representations - called Mulki - which was practiced by erstwhile Nizam who had three regions under him - Telangana, Kannada and Marathi. These rules allowed certain portions of jobs to be given people of that region only. The agreements between Andhra and Telangana leaders included following Mulki rules in the new state.
Unfortunately for Telangana people, all the clauses of these Gentleman's Agreements were immediately flouted. Illegally, thousands of Andhra people were given top jobs in Telangana region. This resulted in mass migration when these top honchos coming from Andhra started to fill other positions with their kith and kin flouting all the guidelines that were established and agreed upon. In fact, any observer will notice that millions of Andhra people have migrated to Telangana region, while negligible Telangana people have migrated to Andhra region.
The fact that Telangana voted a minority and opposition Communist parties during this time to the State Assembly against the majority and ruling Congress party of Andhra didn't help Telangana cause. With Indira Gandhi in power, the states became puppets and Congress became all-powerful. Dissident causes were suppressed ruthlessly.
When the SR Act of 1956 were clearly violated by Andhras, Telangana people launched an agitation in 1969 demanding a separate state. It was overwhelmingly crushed by Indira Gandhi who had no mood for creating new states. Thousands were arrested and put in jail while 350 people protestors were killed in police shootings. Indira Gandhi did not allow splitting of states during her entire regime.
When their agitation was ruthlessly suppressed, the Telangana people took the electoral route in 1971. They launched a new party called Telangana Praja Samiti (TPS) and voted 11 out of 12 Lok Sabha seats clearly indicating the mood of people to carve a separate state. Indira Gandhi, who was at the peak of her power then, called the leader of TPS Channa Reddy, and made him join his party into Congress and made him the Chief Minister of entire Andhra Pradesh. However, an All-Party Agreement of 1969 was agreed to protect the interests of Telangana as a concession.
Those agreed upon formulas were immediately flouted by Andhra people. Now, the Telangana people took the legal route. Their objections were upheld by Supreme Court which asked Andhras to vacate those positions that were illegally acquired.
That's when Andhra people, who knew that Indira Gandhi was dead against all new states, blackmailed Indira Gandhi by asking for a new state for themselves in 1973. Now, the same Andhra people deride Telangana Movement calling it divisive politics. Indira Gandhi's government, in a clear indication of partisan and discriminatory practices, overturned the Supreme Court ruling, thereby clearly establishing the practice of how a majority Andhra can always snub and suppress minority Telangana in the state Assembly. This continues till today as clearly seen from the recent episode where all Andhra and Rayalaseema MLAs resigned en masse from the Assembly on Telangana issue clearly indicating to all observers that no resolution on Telangana will pass through since they comprise the majority.
Such practices of snubbing all the promises continued. GO 36 of 1969 that promised to position Telangana people in 25,000 that were illegally occupied by Andhra people remains unfulfilled even today. During 1973 and 1985 nearly 60,000 illegal positions were awarded to Andhra people in Telangana region. To rectify this, a new GO 610 was introduced in 1985 with a promise to enforce it within a year, but continues to be unimplemented in spite of repeated demands. Telangana people are left with no option - they have tried the electoral, democratic and legal routes - all of them failed. The current democratic setup does not work for minority when the leaders are clearly aligned along partisan lines.
Nagarjuna Sagar dam lies in Telangana region. While the original plan included two canals, one to arid and dry Telangana, and the other to the fertile and inundated Andhra region, only one canal was constructed towards Andhra region, while Telangana continued to remain arid, dry and impoverished. All the recommendations that forced the government to construct the new canal were struck down by the majority and partisan Andhra leaders. The coal mines and power plant of Singareni lie in Telangana region, but the backward districts of Telangana get no power. There are thousands of villages and towns in Telangana where they get two hours of power during entire summer, while people of Andhra experience small inconveniences. Out of 10 government medical colleges in AP, only one exists in non-capital Telangana while 7 of them are based in Andhra-Rayalaseema. The examples are galore. The discrimination is seen in irrigation, in industry, in roads, in canals, in dams, in energy, in education and in employment.
There was consistent and methodical discrimination against people of Telangana for all these years. Newer generation of Andhra and Rayalaseema who had no role in this discrimination find it hard to understand why Telangana people protest for a new state. They have absolutely no idea what has happened in the past and see the present situation in isolation and conclude that Telangana people are brainwashed by their wily and cunning politicians.
Many people discredit Telangana movement by sullying its leaders. They believe that this movement is a product of petty politician's agenda to usurp power. They believe that this cause was invented by politicians to serve their purpose.
They don't realize that the Telangana Movement is a mass movement and a historical movement going back sixty years and is beyond political parties and their agendas. The sentiment is deep and most administrators, bureaucrats, government employees, school teachers, professors, miners, bankers, and intellectuals, scientists support Telangana cause and seek separation. The Telangana cause is not a result of politicians brainwashing its people, but instead a cause of Telangana people being betrayed by politicians again and again. Even now, people of Telangana rally and support only those leaders who have committed to the cause of Telangana. The day these leaders stop supporting this cause, they will abandon them, like they did when they voted out TRS in 2009 because they did not uphold their promise of delivering a new state. This fight for a separate state is a legitimate one and has an expression in Indian politics which is flawed.
Detractors of Telangana movement are worried about status of Hyderabad. No logical observer would conclude that Hyderabad can be separated from Telangana. It is linked to Telangana historically, culturally and geographically. Telangana with Hyderabad as it capital joined Andhra State with Kurnool as its capital to create Andhra Pradesh in 1956. Asking for Hyderabad out of Telangana is like Gujarat asking for Mumbai in 1960 just because Gujaratis have invested a lot into Mumbai. Being cosmopolitan does not warrant a Union Territory status either. Mumbai continues to be the financial capital of India, continues to be cosmopolitan, is home to many migrants and settlers but still belongs to people of that region. In the same way, Hyderabad will continue to belong to people of Telangana and will continue to strive as a cosmopolitan city as a home to many settlers from different parts of the country including those from Andhra and Rayalaseema regions.
Conclusion
The history of Telangana after India's Independence is riddled with false promises and betrayals. Telangana remains marginalized, reduced to minority in their own state, victim of partisan politics, inept democracy and flawed legal system. Telangana remains backward, in education, in agriculture, in industry, in infrastructure, in employment, and in prosperity. Even today, Telangana people are discriminated in their own region. They are seen as inferior, lazy and illiterate. Even the Telangana language is ridiculed and its speakers are butt of many demeaning jokes.
The people of Telangana have a distinct culture, a different history and different temperament in addition to different social and economic status. When one state has two economically and culturally different regions, one being prosperous and the other backward, if corrective measures are not taken to uplift that backward region, there is a great danger that only the prosperous region gets all the attention, funding, new industries, canals, and opportunities, while the people of backward region keep losing out, even in their own region. When such a condition prevails far too long, strong corrective measures are to be taken, and if that does not work, a new state is one of the best solutions.
A separate Telangana is an eventuality. Prolonging this outcome will only increase the animosity of Telangana people towards those who oppose it. Already we have seen many such protests in Telangana. Delaying this eventuality will only cause more pain to the region and will not be good for the future of the two states which share the same language. The people of Andhra and Rayalaseema should welcome this aspiration of Telangana people, respect it and make way for a new Telangana.
The Case for Telangana
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Politics
- » Politics: India
- » Politics: Governance
- » Desicritics.org articles by Sujai
- » All Opinion articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles
Aaman
URL
December 13, 2009
02:56 PM
Thanks for the extensive history behind the Telangana movement. There is no doubt this has been a longstanding demand. The only question one has is what is this term 'Telegana People'? Therein lies a road to ruin the country has taken before and that led to Partition.
Indeed, it is for emotional statements like this that Indian Muslims are asked to unfairly prove their national identity time and again. Doesn't the same principle apply here?
Sujai
URL
December 13, 2009
03:54 PM
Aaman:
India is a very old country. Most old countries are rich in diversity, while most new countries are fairly homogenous. The same applies to genetic diversity. Africans are the most genetically diverse people on the planet.
India has many cultural identities and there is no need to blur them or disown them. In fact, only by allowing the people to celebrate their identities can India remain united.
In Karnataka, there are many cultural identities. If you ask a Konani if he is Kannadiga, there is a good chance he will tell you that he is not. He identifies himself as Konkani first, but still would add that he belongs to Karnataka. In Karnataka alone, there are many cultural identities â€" Coorgi, Konkani and Tulu, in addition to Kannadigas. But you will also notice that most Konkani are quite OK to be part of Karnataka because their group identity doesn’t have many issues living in the state. They are doing quite OK and Karnataka has been treated them quite well. You will realize that most of Mangaloreans do quite well and their cities are towns are prospering. There are always some discontents and it is up to state to address them. For example, the northern districts of Karnataka that have come from Nizam rule are quite backward, illiterate and arid. To alleviate their problems, Karnataka moves their capital to Belgaum once in a while to show their seriousness to develop those regions.
When living in Germany, I realized that each state had their own flag, and most Germans though shy about flying their national flag (because of WWII) are quite proud when flying their regional flags. When I was working in an international company in US where there was an overwhelming presence of Germans, while each of us put up our national flags, Germans put up their regional flags â€" calling themselves Bayerische or Bavarian was equally important to them.
Even in US, Texans love to call themselves Texans and hold aloft their Texan flag. Most southern states continue to hold aloft a confederate flag though they went to war with the Union, and flying this confederate flag is not considered unpatriotic.
Indians have been put in buckets called states, but not all states have done justice to all the cultural identities. Some have been fairly good in giving opportunities to various identities while some states failed miserably in addressing the issues of minority cultural groups.
Though we call certain people Kashmiri, not all people living in Jammu and Kashmir identify themselves with that word. People living in Jammu don’t consider themselves Kashmiri â€" rather they identify themselves with word Dogri. Buddhists of Ladakh don’t think they are Kashmiri or Dogri.
We have many such identities. Though I lived in Andhra Pradesh, I never identified myself with the word Andhra, because there were other people who were called Andhra and we were not similar to them. We had always identified ourselves as Telangana. It was only the outsiders who called us Andhra and it was always difficult to tell them we were not.
The worse is when some people of North used to call us Madrasi. In spite of my repeated explanation of the differences, an acquaintance from Punjab would still introduce me as a Madrasi. If you ask me, I don’t consider myself a Madrasi because I know there are few people from Madras and they are different from me. I would have appreciated if he had taken pains to know the difference between various people of the South. It would be uncomfortable for someone from Haryana if I called all people of North as Bihari.
Calling Telangana people Telangana is not creating divisive politics, but giving respect to that person. That means you have taken pains to realize the difference between an Andhra person and Telangana person though they live in the same state for convenience.
When I visited Indonesia, I got to know that there are different kinds of people. Though they are all Indonesians and many of them are living on the island of Java they make it a point to tell you they are different. Some of them are Sundanese, some are Sumatran, and so on. They will tell you how to identify each one from their names. And over a period of time, you will start identifying who is who. Each of them has a cultural heritage, and they like it when you talk to them of their respective histories. You can start learning words that are local to them and they like it when you show them you have taken pains to learn their unique identities. Putting them all in one bucket actually shows that I am not interested in knowing their culture.
Chandra
December 13, 2009
08:44 PM
I support the creation of Telangana but I also feel that the demand for the state is not as relevant now as it was 50 or 20 years ago. Let us assume that the state is created, how is it going to help the people? Jobs created in Hyderabad will continue to attract people from Andhra and water resources have already been exploited by the Andhra region.
Vinod Joseph
December 13, 2009
11:43 PM
I too support the creation of a Telengana state. Let's not mix up a demand for a separate state with demands for breaking off from India. As long as a distinct regional group is willing to live within the Indian constitution, they are perfectly entitled to seek a province for themselves. Telengana with its Nizam's heritage is culturally and economically distinct from Andhra which was part of the Madras Presidency and hence ruled by the British. Creating Telengana is the only way to give voice to the aspirations to the people of that region.
Daddy_warbucks
December 14, 2009
04:24 PM
If regional identity and history is to be taken as consideration(as has ben done with Telengana), then Hyderabad is justified in craving itself out as a seperate state.
Daddy_Warbucks
December 14, 2009
04:24 PM
If regional identity and history is to be taken as a criteria(as has ben done with Telengana), then Hyderabad is justified in craving itself out as a seperate state.
Daddy_Warbucks
December 14, 2009
04:59 PM
Sujai:
"""It(Hyderabad) is linked to Telangana historically, culturally and geographically."""
Urdu/Muslim Hyderabad is not even as closely linked to Telengana as Andhra is to Telengana. Personally, I think this is a wrong time to go for seperate Telengana as there is more social mobility and economic expansion in the region by virtue of Hyderabad based immigration.
There is justification to see this in a cynical manner as a power grab by telengana politicians, who could not hack it in a democratic setup(last elections). rather they have degenerated into the lowest form of identity politics.
Sujai
URL
December 15, 2009
04:09 AM
Daddy_Warbucks:
Is your concern only with Hyderabad or are your interest also concerns Telangana?
On other topic:
There is justification to see this in a cynical manner as a power grab by telengana politicians, who could not hack it in a democratic setup(last elections). rather they have degenerated into the lowest form of identity politics.
The movement is sixty year old one where people of Telangana try to use their politicians to get what they wanted. If ever, this is a case of people trying to use politicians rather that politicians try to use people.
Morris
December 15, 2009
11:17 AM
I think theoretically too creation of new states makes sense. Divest as much power as possible to the lower units. More the power at the centre more the unrest at the regional level.
Lowest unit is a person. Empower him as much as you can so that integrity of city or township, State and the nation can be maintained.
Next is the city or township. Empower this unit as much as you can to maintain integrity of the state and the nation.
Third unit is the region, call it a state or a province. Form as many these units as possible that makes sense based on culture, language etc. Once again empower the unit as much as possible to maintain unity and integrity of the nation.
Of course these powers should be subject federal constitution guarantee of human rights etc. India still has turmoil going in Asam and elsewhere.
I wonder whether creation of new states can help.
Daddy_Warbucks
December 15, 2009
04:41 PM
Sujai:
//////Daddy_Warbucks:
Is your concern only with Hyderabad or are your interest also concerns Telangana?//////
My interest is primariy Hyderabad. The last two decades saw a lot of money flow into Hyderabad as a result of being the capital of Andhra Pradesh.
I have seen benefits of that wealth trickle down to all sections of society. Telengana residents were net beneficiaries.
More than money, Andhra/NorthIndians have had positive "demonstration effect" on the Telengana residents in and around the Hyd region. As a result, Telengana culture and commerce in these areas are more robust than ever before.
The previously defeated peoples have gained new found confidence and dynamism not found in the more conservative north Telengana.
Daddy_Warbucks
December 15, 2009
04:54 PM
...by defeated I mean, economically defeated. As a result, Telengana culture and commerce in these areas is more robust than ever before.
/////////
The movement is sixty year old one where people of Telangana try to use their politicians to get what they wanted. If ever, this is a case of people trying to use politicians rather that politicians try to use people.
////////////
If people were so driven by Telengana statehood, why the the party(TRS), whose Raison D'Etre was seperate Telengana state, decimated in polls the last time around?
This is an issue that is being raked up by Congress mandarins in Delhi as they are in a bind as to how to deal with succession issue post-YSR.
Dividing the State will have long implications that the masonic Congress seems to have calculated into its future electoral strategy in the region.
Daddy_Warbucks
December 15, 2009
06:08 PM
Moris:
"""""""""Lowest unit is a person. Next is the city or township.Third unit is the region, call it a state or a province.""""""""
Huh? That is the current administative/political setup.
"""""Form as many these units as possible that makes sense based on culture, language etc. """"""
...and gain what? More politicians?
Morris
December 15, 2009
07:58 PM
Daddy
"and gain what?"
Reduce unrest, turmoil and perhaps even violence.
R
December 16, 2009
08:37 AM
Shameful of you to deleted my Pro-AP Post.
Sujai
URL
December 16, 2009
01:57 PM
#11, Daddy_Warbucks:
If people were so driven by Telengana statehood, why the the party(TRS), whose Raison D'Etre was seperate Telengana state, decimated in polls the last time around?
Andhra people and Telangana have diametrically opposite views on the verdict of the elections results.
In 2004, TRS contested elections on a single point agenda â€" to secure separate Telangana. They didn’t talk about development, they didn’t talk about caste, they didn’t talk about religion, or any other incentives. So, if someone voted for TRS in Telangana, he did so because he wanted a separate Telangana. Congress formed an alliance with TRS promising a new state called Telangana if they come to power in the center. So, it was clear. If you were voting TRS or Congress in Telangana, you wanted Telangana.
In those elections, TRS-Congress won a clear mandate from the people.
Once the elections happened, Congress was in power in center and in the state. Naturally, Telangana expected Congress to fulfill the promise. It did not. TRS was in a lurch. They didn’t have enough muscle power to pull it off. They floundered and did all kinds of gimmicks. Telangana people got disillusioned with TRS/KCR who didn’t deliver on his promises.
In 2009 elections, every party promised Telangana. TDP, Congress, Communists, Prajarajyam, and host others, along with TRS. That means if you wanted Telangana, you could vote any party this time. That’s exactly what happened. TRS lost its vote bank to other parties who promised the same.
Now, Andhra people read this as a clear rejection of Telangana sentiment because TRS lost, whereas Telangana people see it as a clear affirmation of Telangana sentiment because every party which won had endorsed a new state. According to Telangana people, Telangana sentiment is now endorsed by every party making it universal and stronger, whereas Andhra people think of it as dilution.
Somik Raha
URL
December 17, 2009
12:32 PM
There is something fundamentally coercive about the formation of any state. In the case of Telangana, if there are any people within the incubating state who don't want it to separate, their voices will be suppressed, and they will have to just accept the will of the majority. This was, of course, the case with Andhra and any other state and country formation. This is why the term "aspirations of a people" gives me a lot of pause.
Having said that, I sincerely hope not just Telangana, but a whole bunch of other states get formed along with it, for entirely different reasons.
mrm
February 18, 2010
01:41 PM
suraj,
Thanks for an excellent article from your observations/experiences. All across the world, in many countries, cultural/ethnic identities are as important as national identity.
India's founder's knew the enormous diversity all across this great nation. And they came up with a powerful and simple motto, "unity in diversity".
I personally do not think that, formation of telangana will benefit the region. Only time will tell, if any of us are right on this. It is sad but true, that lot of development over the last 40 years, in Andhra pradesh has been focussed in one particular place, i.e hyderabad region. I personally know, development in major towns in Rayalaseema (kurnool town, anantapur town, cuddapah, tirupathi) has been very minimal when compared to that in the Hyderabad area. For many reasons that are beyond this discussion, this has been the case in most of the states across india. My guess is (sadly as it may be), that this will be the case for the many decades in the future. It will never be like some of the western countries (USA, GERMANY, FRANCE, etc), where smaller cities/towns across have similar facilities(schools, hospitals, food chains, entertainment, etc) as the big cities.
Despite many hardships in the telangana region, the people have maintained their strong and powerful identity. And I am very sure, that they will maintain their cultural/ethnic identity in the future. So I do not think, there should be a state formed only for their identity.
MRM
Add your comment