Dr. K.Vidyasagar*
Thanks to Dr.B.R.Ambedkar, the Constitution of India has a provision, under Article 3, to create any new state or alter the boundaries of any existing state or states. The Constitution that recognized plural character of Indian society has obviously facilitated the creation of more than one dozen new states, in the last 50 years. Interestingly, none of these 14 states was created with the recommendation of any so-called States Reorganisation Committee (SRC). Incidentally, the first and last of such SRC was headed by Justice Fazal Ali who was on record opposing merger of Telangana state (erstwhile state of Hyderabad) with the newly created Andhra state (from Madras state). In fact, the passage of Bill in the Parliament under this article (3) is sufficient to create any state, irrespective of the opinion (leave alone consensus) of concerned parent state, as is demanded by the antagonists of new state formation today! In a way, this attitude tantamounts to an act of playing politics with the issue of new state formation.
Historical Justification
Historically, the separate identity of telangana people and area, as part of the princely state of Hyderabad, was established during the course of more than four centuries-old history and culture, under the regime of Nizams. Incidentally, the Hyderabad state continued to enjoy independence from the British, thanks to Nizam, not just up to August 15, 1947, but beyond, at least till September 17, 1948, when Indian armies having entered Hyderabad compelled the Nizam to surrender. The Hyderabad state lost its independence once for all, and it became one of Indias several provinces. The multi-lingual Hyderabad state continued as one for four more years thereafter, till it was trifurcated, against the will of local people, and merged each part with a distinct area, all in the name of linguistic states regorgaisation! Thus, the telugu-speaking telangana was merged with Andhra state in 1956, on the basis of a promise that guaranteed certain safeguards to Telangana populace.
Not a Smaller State, but a new state of bigger size
Unlike the case of smaller states’ movement in India, the movement was not about ‘administrative convenience’ through ‘reducing the size of Andhra Pradesh’. It is ridiculous to treat Telangana issue as the issue of ‘size’ or ‘administration’ of the region, as is diplomatically raised by the parties and groups like BJP and RSS. As a matter of fact, once the demand is conceded, the Telangana would be bigger state than those existing 16 states in India today! With a population of more than one and half times of that of Nepal, the Telangana state would be of 3.5 crore size. Unlike other three states, which were created by the BJP in the year 2000, the state of Telangana does not require any special money for the construction of its state capital city, as the centuries-old Hyderabad is located in the heart of Telangana itself!
Not about Regional Development, but about Identity of people
Nor is it about ‘regional development’ of ‘backward Telangana’. But it is about state response to the most democratic demand of creation of new state. In any case, it is ridiculous to view Telangana state demand as demand for either ‘welfare’ or ‘development’, be it regionally or economically, as is propagated by the present chief minister. Because, once such argument is promoted, then there are electoral communists ready to join the chorus of raising the question of ‘backward regions’ and demand to treat Telangana on par with those backward regions of the state viz., Rayalaseema, Uttarandhra etc. Then they would be generously seeking the ‘packages’ ‘development funds’ from the central government and thereby confuse the genuine demand of Telangana state once for all. In other words, Telangana is a very distinct and unique case. In case of comparison, it could be either Kashmir or Junagarh; both were once princely states in India. Prior to these states were made part of India, these states were given the promise of holding ‘plebiscite’, indeed!
Not about Division of a State, but for Revival of an old state
In fact, the case of Telangana is more a revival of an old state, than a creation of a new state! Telangana, as part of erstwhile state of Hyderabad, existed as an independent state during the period 1952-56. The state was trifurcated in the name of ‘linguistic reorganisation of states’, only to please those Andhra congress lobbyists who were divided on common capital for Andhra state. The Telugu-speaking Telangana state was merged with the Andhra state, against the feelings of Telangana people, their representatives and also against the recommendations of Justice Fazal Ali, who chaired the first and last ‘States Reorganisation Committee’, popularly known as SRC. As usual, the electoral communists played the dubious role of ‘class collaboration in the name of linguistic unity’.
Against the recommendation of the SRC
Notwithstanding its sanctity and popular support, the six-point promise alone was the basis for state formation. There was no referendum of telangana people, nor was there any recommendation of the SRC (which recommended against merger of Telangana with Andhra state, indeed!) to that effect. Even the Hyderabad State Assembly was divided on the hasty decision. Surprisingly, Prime Minister Nehru’s views on the need of continuation of Telangana reflect the feeling of the then Central government. But still, the state was formalized on war footing and thereby suppressed the sentiments of local people. As against the promise of incorporating the word, telangana, in the new state of Telugu-speaking people, Andhra Pradesh came into existence.
Congressmen agreement that was violated long ago
Then, what precipitated the illegal action of hasty merger was the imposition of Andhra Congress leaders’ viewpoint in the form of ‘Gentlemen agreement’, an historical blunder that was never respected either in letter or in spirit. Who were these gentlemen? Which party they belonged to, by and large? It is those congress leaders who were under the control of Congress coterie that played a dubious role so as to bulldoze the Telangana leaders. Since the Congress party members largely represented the ‘gentlemen agreement’ (it was more a congressmen agreement indeed!), then that party alone has to own the responsibility. Besides, the formation of the state was contractual and conditional (as it was subject to the six-point formula/gentlemen agreement), and its very violation on the very first day can be understood as negating the state formation itself!
Thus, it is pertinent here to recollect the violation of this undemocratic agreement by the first chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, Neelam Sanjeeva reddy ridiculing the post of Deputy Chief ministership as sixth finger and thus useless! While he served as Deputy Chief Minister in the B.Gopal reddy’s regime till October 31, 1956, the post became ridiculous to him by November 1, 1956! It was one of the six-point formulas that were violated on the very first day of formation of Andhra Pradesh. How can the contract be continued if one of its conditions were violated? Does it not tantamount to one-sided contract? It is regrettable to note that such one-sided contract had been imposed on Telangana for that past five decades, thanks to its leaders’ stony silence.
Unparallel Student sacrifices kept the movement alive
Obviously, there were movements and agitations against such political merger and suppression of telangana identity long before the emergence of Jai Telangana movement in 1969! But, thanks to monopolistic control over states and provinces by the congress on the one hand, and success of heroic Telangana armed struggle on the other had, the separate telangana movement was never given due attention during the period. However, the accumulated anger against the discriminatory policies of the Andhra-dominated governments had at last culminated in the form of 1969 agitation that cost the lives of more than 370 students in Telangana alone!
Historic mandate upheld the democratic demand
A predominantly student-organised Telangana Praja Samithi (TPS) became popular throughout the region and thereby secured the electoral support in the Loksabha elections held in 1971 itself. For, this movement-turned party, TPS secured the popular mandate in terms of winning 11 Loksabha seats (out of 14 seats), swimming across all the currents against both the Congress and the Communists, from the Telangana region. The TPS victory was preceded by the unparallel sacrifice of students and youths of Telangana in terms of year-long agitations throughout the Telangana region. Obviously, not only the congress men but also the heroic communists lost confidence of the people, and thus failed to win any significant number of seats in the 1971 elections held in Telangana areas!
Undemocratic Response of the Central government
Incidentally, it was Indira Gandhi who faced the challenges of this movement, but failed to manipulate it. Although she ensured coercive suppression of Telangana movement in 1969-70, she could not contain the democratic aspirations of the people electorally. Failed to respond to such electoral upheaval in a peaceful manner, she had to resort to anti-democratic and unethical means, only to betray the democratic spirit of that movement. Of course, the leaders and followers of the movement failed to withstand the pressure tactics of the Indira Gandhi government. Thus, the TPS leadership had to yield to the pressures and favours of the Prime Minister disgracefully, in terms of surrendering all the TPS’s MPs to Indira Gandhi for few crumbs.
At a time when Indira Gandhi was emerging as the only popular leader in the wake of Bangladesh war in 1971, none could dare, leave alone attempt, taking on her leader ship, from within or without, the congress party. Having established her supremacy even in the electoral battle held around same time, Indira Gandhi became a virtual dictator. Given the changed times, the telangana movement got derailed and leaderless. Although some alternative noises were raised against the leadership betrayal in telangana, Indira Gandhi was never convinced on the issue of statehood for telangana!
Recent movement of parties and politicians
Although the movement has always been a democratic one, as the popular mandate was recorded whenever there was one (as was demonstrated even in the 2004 elections!), the Central government played a dubious role. It offered a couple of unpopular packages in the form of five, six and eight-point formulae and such agreements, but seldom solved the genuine demand of telangana people. As the so-called gentlemen agreement was offered as a condition for Telangana merger to dilute the popular aspirations of the people earlier, there were a few such attempts (Presidential speech, Pranab Mukherjee committee etc.,) to co-opt the telangana politicians into the positions of power either at the Center or in the state thereafter (offering ministerial positions to the TRS leaders!), and thereby weakening the Telangana movement once for all.
However, the movement raised the banner of revolt not only against the Congress governments both in Hyderabad and Delhi but also to seek resignations of TRS ministers from the alliance ministries. This changed course of political relations marked an end of short-lived honeymoon between the Congress and the TRS once for all. Thus, the saga of Telangana struggles continues unabated, and on end! It is immaterial if the movement is led by TRS today or any other party tomorrow, for that matter. Ultimately, democratic component of the Telangana demand might keep the movement alive, notwithstanding the politics of telangana politicians.
Kvsagar2@hotmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment