Telangana XII: Ignorance, Bad Faith and Low Opinion

In the last few days, many commenters hailing from Andhra region living either in Telangana or Andhra region have expressed extreme concern for their fellow brothers in Telangana. They have tried to warn us that we will be worse off in a separate Telangana. They have told us that we will be better off in united Andhra Pradesh.

They cautioned us about Telangana politicians who are wily and cunning. They have tried to enlighten us from the brainwashing our politicians have done to stir this agitation which has only sole purpose – to benefit politicians. They have tried to tell us that this whole charade of Telangana agitation does not benefit any one – that it is a zero-sum game. The only benefiters are the corrupt Telangana politicians. They have highlighted the wretchedness of our Telangana leaders and ridiculed our leaders only to make us understand that these are the kind of leaders Telangana would have.

They have opined that Hyderabad would lose out in investments, that it would lose its shine, that the development would stop, that the new state would not develop at all, that it would just waste away. They told us that the new state of Telangana would be very different from other cities of India - settlers would be targeted and that investors would live in fear. They told us that unlike in Bangalore or Mumbai, where settlers from various regions invest and make it their home, Hyderabad in the hands of Telangana people would be parochial and chauvinistic, thereby kicking out the non-Telangana people.

With so many well wishers of Telangana coming from Andhra region it is becoming hard for me to separate from Andhra Pradesh. I am wondering then how come so many people of Telangana, the students, the professors, the bank employees, the teachers, the government employees, the miners, the officials, the administrators, scientists, intellectuals, are coming out to voice their support for a separate Telangana. Don’t the Telangana people realize how much their Andhra brothers care for them? How come we are under this spell of madmen politicians? How come we are not able to see through their guise while our brothers in Andhra are so perceptive?

So what is wrong with this picture?

Why don’t Telangana people trust their Andhra brothers when they care so much for our development and well-being- when they want us all to stay united like one family?

For a while, I am going to take this concern of Andhra people at the face value. Many of them expressed anguish at this separation. I am going to believe their care and concern for us is genuine and they have completely no ulterior motive to keep Hyderabad for themselves. I am going to believe that they really came to Telangana and occupied all the high positions and then invited their kith and kin to occupy other positions only to educate and enlighten illiterate Telangana people, the way British came into India with a divine purpose to civilize the uncivilized Indians. Or maybe it was just an opportunity that they rode on without an ill will for their Telangana brothers.

These people from Andhra who don’t want to see this state broken up to serve the petty politicians and their agenda of fomenting parochialism want the people of Telangana to stay united and work towards betterment of Telangana people under the aegis of united Andhra Pradesh. These people will believe that somehow the politicians of Andhra are better off compared to politicians of Telangana – why else would they warn us not to get swayed by the crafty politicians of Telangana?

They want us to work things out. If there is any problem they want to hear it and address it. I am quite sure that these are genuine people with genuine interest to see their Telangana brothers get the necessary incentives to improve their region.

But before we come to the common ground where our genuinely concerned Andhra brothers can solve the problems of Telangana, they need to understand few things. First, they need to understand how our democracy works. Next, they need to read a bit about history. That way we can talk the same language, otherwise there will be huge disparity in our information content.

Workings of Indian democracy

They need to understand how our democracy allows a majority to completely suppress a minority consistently for decades without having to be accountable for it. If a region called Telangana elected Communist Party to the Assembly and a region called Andhra elected Congress to the Assembly and if the majority happens to be Congress and if the Center is also governed by Congress, almost nothing that these Communists represent would lead to fruition. Every demand of theirs can be thrown out without having to pay for the consequences. They could be marginalized consistently and still the democracy appears to be working. The only people facing the wrath of such democracy happen to be those people residing in those regions which had voted those communists into power. That happened to be Telangana.

Even if Telangana people learn the art of democracy and vote Congress leaders into power, you could lose out if the leaders of your region happen to be in minority. Nothing that you promote would be taken up by the majority and there is a chance that you will be marginalized consistently for decades. Take the current case for example, when the Center said that they will pass the resolution in Andhra Assembly the majority belonging to Andhra and Rayalaseema has already decided to vote against it making it impossible for minority leaders of Telangana to make a case. In such starkly partisan politics, the minority would always lose out.

A little dose of history

Second, our brothers need to learn history in greater detail. They have been fed with stories from our text books which embellish all our achievements and completely cover up all our mistakes. They create artificial stories to tell them that Potti Sriramulu fasted for entire Andhra Pradesh when in fact he was solely concerned with welfare of his Andhra people. They do not tell the students how Andhras first fought for Madras and when they did not get it, they fought for Hyderabad by combining Telangana into the state. They do not tell the students that even when Andhra Pradesh was formed it was clearly recommended that Telangana could go separate way if things didn’t work out for its people. They do not tell the students how First SRC clearly made a case for Telangana as a separate state which was ignored by New Dehli. They do not tell the students how Gentleman’s Agreement that was agreed upon to protect the interests of Telangana people was eventually flouted completely. They do not tell how the agreements were broken to give thousands of jobs to Andhras in Telangana region. They do not tell how each and every agreement on irrigation, resources and revenues were flouted to benefit Andhra people.

Telugu people do not learn about why Telangana agitation took place and why 350 people died in those shootings. They do not tell the students how a deal was brokered to keep Telangana by offering six-point program and that it was later revoked. They do not tell how GO 36 and GO 610 were initially promised and then when the agitation subsided they were revoked by Andhra politicians.

They do not tell you how the majority Andhra took the state to ransom each time when Telangana leaders try to get what promised to them. They don’t tell the students that it was Andhra politicians who asked for a separate state in 1973 to overturning the Supreme Court ruling that protected the interests of Telangana people. In the last twenty years the implementation of GO 610 was stopped against the wishes of Telangana people.

Bad Faith

The history of Telangana is fraught with broken promises, suppression of minority Telangana by majority Andhra, overruling and overturning of legal judgments that favored Telangana people protection, implementation of discriminatory policies in irrigation, education, employment and energy.

Andhra people wrote many checks which eventually bounced. The history is fraught with so much bad faith that people of Telangana are unable to trust their Andhra brothers anymore. So you have to excuse us when we don’t take your words of care and concern at the face value. Too much has happened in the history that we cannot ignore those cases.

Low Opinion

The commenters from Andhra have cajoled their Telangana brothers to stay united, not to break this country into tiny states, and preserve a united Telugu land where all Telugu people can prosper under one banner. While those remarks show utmost care and concern for their fellow Telangana brothers, one cannot ignore a tone of condescension in them.

When the give their advice, they do it as if they occupy a superior moral ground and higher purpose of keeping the country united, preserving Telugu culture, and ensuring investments continue to happen, while their Telangana brothers go about streets, rioting, burning buses, drunken by the parochial and chauvinistic passions of identity politics creates solely to get political mileage by wile and cunning Telangana politicians.

They deride Telangana people, and their inability to grasp the loss they are going to endure. They believe that Telangana people are acting like as zombies who have no mind of their own. They describe Telangana people as lazy, losers, who didn’t fight enough for themselves in the past. They believe that Telangana people are naïve, completely ignorant, a herd of sheep that follows the butcher to the slaughterhouse.

These words of care and concern sound hollow to us when it is coming from such a supercilious stand and we dismiss them the way Indians dismissed the caring words of Winston Churchill.

What do we expect from Andhra people?

We expect solidarity from Andhra people on this juncture, a sense of camaraderie, a note that suggests they understand our plight, not ridicule our cause. Without that, it would be hard for us to believe that there is even a chance we could continue to stay united.

We want them to question their own leaders why so many GOs that were designed to protect Telangana people were never implemented. We want them to question their leaders why there was no canal from Nagarjuna Sagar dam to Telangana. We want to question their leaders why they allowed so many Andhra people to take up jobs in Telangana while almost no Telangana person was given a job in Andhra.

We want to question their leaders why they voted the minority Telangana into submission each time their raised their issues in the State Assembly. We want to ask their leaders why they flouted each of the ‘Gentlemen’s Agreement’ that harmed the relationship with Telangana people.

Also, we expect Andhra people NOT to keep raising the issue of Hyderabad again and again. That’s when we start doubting your motives. We start believing that your only incentive to stay with us is because Hyderabad belongs to us. And each time you say that you want Hyderabad as a Union Territory it further corroborates our belief that you don’t have an iota of care or concern for your Telangana brothers. We start asking, so not only did you do injustice to us all these years, now, you want our only city as well?

[The related posts are at: Case for Telangana, Telangana - A New State, Telangana II, Telangana III, Telangana IV, Telangana V: Political angle, Telangana VI: Hyderabad State?, Telangana VII: Political Drama, Telangana VIII: You need to make a case, History of Telangana I, Telangana IX: Riots turn ugly, Telangana X: Congratulations!, Vision for Telangana I, History of Telangana II, Telangana XI: Why so much opposition?]

Case for Telangana

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 the Indian Independence, 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.

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. People of Telangana had a different opinion – they didn’t think it was a wise move. Telananga 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 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 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 was 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 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 continued 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 but most of the water is given to Coastal Andhra contravening agreements. While the original plan of Srisailam project 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 two hours of power during entire summer, while people of Andhra experience small inconveniences. Of the 59 lakh hectrase proposed for irrigation under YS Rajashekar Reddy government, only 16 lakh hectares was planned for Telangana - only 27% allocation though it constitutes more than 40% in area and population. 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 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. 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. Hyderabad 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 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.

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.

The struggle for Telangana is not about creating smaller states for the purpose of better administration. It is not just about alleviating the problems of backwardness. It is not just about identity politics created for serving selfish interests of some politicians. It is not about creating a new state or splitting a state. It is about restoring a state that originally had an existence. It is a genuine movement of people who constitute a historical, cultural, economic and geographical entity and has a voice in self-expression, self-rule, self-determinism within legal confines of Indian Constitution and Indian democracy which made certain promises to its people at the time of Independence.

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.

OTHER POSTS

If you are keen on knowing more about this topic, you can read through the following posts:

Telangana: A New State: 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… 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.

Telangana II: The detractors to the formation of Telangana give the following reasons: 1. Andhra people will take away all their investments from Telangana, 2. Muslims will dominate if Telangana becomes a State, 3. Hyderabad will become a Union Territory; away from both Andhra and Telangana, 4. Andhra people are hardworking, enterprising and well-educated, 5. Andhra Telugu is superior – everyone should become like them, 6. We will lose our identity as Telugu people. All these are mere excuses. In reality, a separate Telangana makes sense for one reason alone- that its people want it.

Telangana III: There is no animosity towards anyone while creating Telangana, not even Andhra people. Fight for Telangana is not new. It has been there since the inception of Andhra Pradesh. TRS is just a political party that came into cash in on the prevailing mood of Telangana people to have a separate state. TRS is not Telangana. And one cannot rubbish a movement based on the quality of its leaders.

Telangana IV: Some of the questions from commenters are answered here: Why should Hyderabad be given to Telangana? Do land-locked states fail economically? Do new states take long time to form? Will the new state has to grapple new problems like crime?

Telangana V: Political Angle: Though we should have got Telangana during NDA regime, it did not happen. So, why did we not get Telangana along with Chattisgarh, Uttarkhand and Jharkhand? So, when will we get our Telangana? What are the political angles that are delaying creation of Telangana?

Telangana VI: Hyderabad State?: Many detractors would want to create a Hyderabad state out of Telangana. Is there any merit to such a demand? Hyderabad has always been a part of Telangana. Can the immigrants of a land ask for a separate status by flooding a city or a piece of land? Imagine the immigrants of Mumbai cutting the city away from Maharashtra or Bangladeshi immigrants cutting away Kolkata from West Bengal.

Telangana VII: Political Drama: TRS, the most vocal of all parties to demand a separate Telangana lost many seats to TDP and Congress in the recently held by-elections. What does it mean? Did Telangana Movement lost its wind? Why did TRS bring upon us these by-elections? Is TRS same as Telangana Movement? What is Telangana ‘sentiment’? Why did TRS lose? Why are other political parties embracing Telangana ‘sentiment’? Is political outcome same as referendum?

Telangana VIII: You need to make a case: All those who seek a Hyderabad state carved out of Telangana, you need to make a case. First, you were not willing to give us a separate state. Now, you ask for a separate Hyderabad state. Your case is quite flimsy and is fraught with greed, selfishness and extreme self-centeredness. The case for Telangana, which includes Hyderabad as its center, was always valid from the time of inception of the state. There is no case of creating Hyderabad into a new state cutting it away from Telangana.

History of Telangana I: Sardar Vallabhai Patel under Nehru Government decided to intervene. The police action, called Operation Polo, was launched on 13th September, 1948. Within four days, Osman Ali Khan, the Nizam, surrendered. So, the people of living in Hyderabad State obtained Independence after one year, on 17th September, 1948.

Telangana X: Congratulations! : Why does it always come to this in India? Why should people get onto streets, protest, pillage, vandalize, beat up, destroy, before the government concedes to their demands? Why should the people hold government at ransom before the government starts making sense? Why can’t it be proactive and take necessary measures to alleviate concerns of various groups and identities?

Vision for Telangana I: What shall we do when we get our Telangana? What is our vision and what are our objectives? How shall we correct the mistakes of the past? How shall we better the lives of our people? How shall we make Telangana a great place to live?

Telangana XI: Why so much opposition?: The Telangana region, with Hyderabad deeply embedded inside it geographically, being part of its culture and historical heritage, being its capital city, joined Andhra Pradesh reluctantly and now it wants to opt out after the 50 year marriage failed. It’s not like Telangana sprung a surprise of separation. Starting from the formation of the state itself it has made many protests through various forums.

History of Telangana II: One of the misconceptions that are flouted nowadays is that Potti Sriramulu fought for a greater and unified Vishalandhra comprising all Telugu people under one state. There is no truth to this. He had in fact fought for extremely local demands for his own people, and not Telangana people.

Telangana XII: Ignorance, Bad Faith and Low Opinion: [Andhra people] need to read a bit about history. That way we can talk the same language… Andhra people wrote many checks which eventually bounced. The history is fraught with so much bad faith that people of Telangana are unable to trust their Andhra brothers anymore… These words of care and concern sound hollow to us when it is coming from such a supercilious stand and we dismiss them.

Telangana XIII: Let’s stay United!: Here are three issues that Andhra politicians should go ahead and implement. If you can make this work, we are going to completely stop all movements towards creating a separate state. We will start believing that you are indeed going to honor your commitments towards your Telangana brothers.

Telangana XIV: Letter to Andhra Brothers: Dear Andhra Brothers…Let me tell you Samaikya Andhra is artificially created false feeling that has been successfully planted into minds of your people. All this is the work of selfish leaders of Andhra. You have become obsessed with this idea. But if you think rationally keeping your emotions aside you will see reason. [Parody on Andhra people’s comments]

Telangana XV: Concerns: Here I address some of the concerns raised by detractors of Telangana Movement. Why are Telangana people bent on dividing the country and state? Why are Telangana people bent on separation when rest of Andhra wants to stay united? Should the settlers in Hyderabad panic now because of jingoism of Telangana agitation? Shouldn’t Hyderabad belong to rest of Andhra as much as it belongs to people of Telangana?

Telangana XVI: Samaikya Andhra: And when they say they are going to fight for Samaikya Andhra, you would think that there would be overtures to Telangana people asking them to stay back or something like that. They don’t even address Telangana people. They address themselves and say, we will make sure Telangana doesn’t break away.

Telangana XVII: More Concerns: Here I address some more concerns raised by detractors of Telangana Movement. Isn’t Telangana Movement a purely selfish interest of politicians in their attempt to secure power? Didn’t TRS lose elections in 2009 clearly indicating there is no support for separate Telangana? Why didn’t the politicians of Telangana fast for development instead of fast for separation?

Telangana XVIII: Betrayal: Telangana people are watching this act of betrayal as it unfolds on live media…They have not forgotten what Chandra Babu promised. They have not forgotten what Chiranjeevi said…If ever there is one thing that is common for all people of Telangana and a common theme in its post-Independence history, it is betrayal.

Telangana XIX: Hyderabad a Union Territory?: So, is Hyderabad a part of Telangana? Or is it a city that has grown to be quite different altogether leaving behind Telangana? Should each cosmopolitan city in India be asked to vote if they want to be independent of the region they reside in? Should we hold referendums in cities as well, treating them like states?

Telangana XX: Welcome the Change: Dear Andhra brothers, Welcome the change. Don’t resist it…Shake hands with Telangana people, give up Hyderabad to those people who legitimately own it and earn the plaudits as a mature friend. Prolonging this will only sour the relationship for all of us. It will become bitter soon. And after that it will turn into poison for all of us.

Telangana XI: Why so much opposition?

[The related posts are at: Telangana - A New State, Telangana II, Telangana III, Telangana IV, Telangana V: Political angle, Telangana VI: Hyderabad State?, Telangana VII: Political Drama, Telangana VIII: You need to make a case, History of Telangana I, Telangana IX: Riots turn ugly, Telangana X: Congratulations!, Vision for Telangana I, History of Telangana II]

Imagine if for convenience, during the time of US Independence they had decided to have only 6 states in the new Union by merging the erstwhile 13 independent nations into groups. Imagine Massachusetts was combined with Connecticut to form a new state. If, after 50 years of trying to make the new combined state work, they realize that it is not working out. They want to separate again. Would Boston that was part of Massachusetts go to Connecticut for any reason? Or would it remain with Massachusetts?

Any observer would easily conclude that Boston would go with Massachusetts. However that’s not how Andhra-Rayalaseema is arguing right now. When Andhra Pradesh was formed, Telangana brought Hyderabad into the state and now when it wants to move out because the marriage of convenience has not worked out they are being deprived of Hyderabad.

Imagine Churchill saying to Indians, you can have India but not New Delhi, because we have invested too much in it. Or imagine Pakistanis claiming New Delhi with an ‘almost’ perfectly reasonable argument that they are inheritors of the legacy and tradition of Mughal Empire - that they invested in heavily and built the city of New Delhi and also contributed to taxes that British used to build Lutyens’ New Delhi.

Hypothetically let’s imagine a situation where in Karnataka is now divided into north and south Karnatakas for whatever reason. Any observer with iota of intelligence would conclude that Bangalore would go to South Karnataka. His logic would be simple – historically and geographically Bangalore was always an integral part of South Karnataka. Now, imagine the residents of Bangalore, comprising huge chunk of Telugus, Malayalis, Tamils and even North Karnataka people who claim that they are actually in majority, protesting against this. They say, they don’t want the IT and biotech to slowdown in the city, and that they are completely averse to be part of the petty politics that is dividing this state. They decide not to get involved. Instead, they say, they want to opt out of this divisive politics and convert their city into a Union Territory depriving both regions of the city.

Imagine Gujaratis claiming Bombay city for themselves at the time of separation in 1960 claiming they have invested heavily into Bombay for centuries. Or imagine the immigrants of Mumbai converting the city into Union Territory depriving the Marathis of the city claiming it is a cosmopolitan city and financial capital of India. Imagine the immigrants depriving the Bengalis of Kolkata.

That’s what is happening in Telangana now.

The Telangana region, with Hyderabad deeply embedded inside it geographically, being part of its culture and historical heritage, being its capital city, joined Andhra Pradesh reluctantly and now it wants to opt out after the 50 year marriage failed. It’s not like Telangana sprung a surprise of separation. Starting from the formation of the state itself it has made many protests through various forums, including protests of 1950s, agitation of 1969, elections of 1971 and through election manifestos in 1990s.

The current situation in Andhra-Rayalaseema

These protests that are being carried out in Andhra for ‘Samaikya Andhra’ sound hollow. When we want to move out of the marriage there is no fun if you keep holding us back. We have been giving you enough feelers for the last sixty years for you to understand we are not happy with the marriage. Time and again you have come up with terms of reconciliation which have failed only because those terms were never implemented – they just remained hollow promises. We want to move out of this relationship but you are not able to understand and appreciate our position.

Why are you imposing yourself onto us when we want to live our lives separately? Can’t you be mature enough to let us go?

The relationship is already sour. Delaying this inevitable separation is only going to make it bitter and if prolonged it is going to make it venomous for all of us. As mature individuals we should decide part ways and stay friends.

There are many immigrants in this country in various cities. Tamils and Gujaratis have made Mumbai their home. Telugus, Malayalees, Tamils have made Bangalore their home. But just because these cities have allowed other people to settle down in their cities should not start making these cities converted into Union Territories or being separated from their regions.

Such experiments have not worked out in history. Geographical continuity is as important as cultural and historical continuity. Berlin was lying in the midst of East Germany and yet some portion remained with West Germany. Billions of Dollars have been spent to keep the city that way and thousands lost their lives – in the end it was sheer waste and just a matter of pride and ego.

Rosaiah said that they would see if there is majority in the Assembly for Telangana. How long will the majority impose itself onto the minorities? Currently, there are 171 MLAs of Andhra and Rayalaseema easily outnumbering 123 MLAs of Telangana. Therefore it is clear there will be no majority. Is this how India is going to protect its minorities? By allowing the majority to vote against minority?

Imagine what must have happened in the past.

Who wants to build canal from Nagarjunasagar dam to Telangana? Say Yes, Say No. Good the majority doesn’t want it.

Now, we have to establish 500 schools? Who says there should 450 in Andhra? Say Yes. Good the majority wants it.

Though this is an exaggeration to drive a point, it was not hard to imagine how this could have unfolded in the last fifty years. In 1950s and 1960s, Congress Party was dominant in Andhra and Rayalaseema because they were under British, while Communist Party was dominant in Telangana. Even if the voting in Assembly was along the party lines which is what happens in India, Telangana would lose out. In 1970s, corrupt MLAs, MPs and CMs of Telangana were brought in to sing the tune of national agenda to keep the state together. These leaders betrayed their own people again and again citing they didn’t have enough power to wield. When the transparency was minimal, when the MLAs could be bought for a sum, when a region is already backward, Telangana MLAs were bought were a price and asked to sing the tune of united state.

Telangana lost out because it had to carry the burden of keeping the marriage working and pretending everything was alright while suffering and enduring discrimination all the while. Telangana lost out because the Indira Gandhi’s Congress was not ready to create more states. Telangana lost out because they had to unnecessarily live with the tag of united Telugu when they were only concerned with their self-rule, self-expression and self-development.

We don’t want continue with charade any longer. We don’t want to be cowed down by the majority of Andhra-Rayalaseema. We just want to be on our own so that our politicians, however vile they are, are at least accountable to us. So that they spend the money they get in our region, even if they eat half of it, at least we get the other half. Self-rule, self-development and self-expression are more important to us than the unity under a tag called Telugu. This tag does not even make sense when many Telangana people actually feel that their language is treated inferiorly by their Andhra brothers.

People of Telangana were a reluctant party to this marriage from the beginning – now we want it to end. We want to go our separate way with our state. If Hyderabad happens to be part of our region, please live with it.

Has it always been about capital city?

Why do you have so much love for people of Telangana that you want stay united with us? Do you have love for us or just the love for our city of Hyderabad? Long ago, you vied the city of Chennai and try to get it from Tamils and you have failed. Now you want city of Hyderabad.

It’s high time people of Andhra built their own capital city and I am quite sure they will build a city far bigger and better than Hyderabad – there is no doubt that people of Andhra are more educated, industrious and enterprising. They have a rich cultural heritage, a far better agriculture economy, much better land reforms, and far more business men. I actually believe this.

I am quite aware of inadequacies of Telangana people. We have to do a lot to overcome our weaknesses. But we want to do that on our own. Hope you understand that.

If United States or France says, come join my country, because we have access to funds and investments, Indians would proudly say, Sorry. We may want to make progress like you, but on our own, not by joining you.

History of Telangana II

1948-1952 Influx of Andhra People

It has to be noted that with no such precedence in Independent Indian political history, for four years, civil and military administrators ruled Hyderabad State. This period saw a huge influx of Andhra people into this region taking up all the new positions that the new India was throwing open to its people. With the pretext that people of Telangana were not educated in English or Telugu, the positions were filled up people from Andhra region. Once these people occupied these vital positions, they in turn invited many of their kith and kin to fill in many other positions. The history of Telangana Movement owes its origin to a certain extent to this period. During this time, it became evident to the people of Telangana that future holds complete marginalization of its people.

We don’t make a record of migrations within the state, but if there is such a statistic, it will clearly reveal that millions of Andhra people migrate to Telangana occupying many positions in the government offices, banks, schools, colleges, universities, etc. Also, there was a great influx of businessmen from Andhra who had sold off their lands and assets in Andhra and setup business in Telangana region. We will also notice almost negligible migration happened from Telangana to Andhra regions during this period.

Mulki Rules Flouted

The Nizam set up schools, colleges, madrasas and a University that imparted education in Urdu. Nizam, who had great admiration for British, started Hyderabad Civil Service (HCS) similar to Indian Civil Service (ICS). Though Nizam had three different regions in his kingdom – Telugu, Kannada and Marathi regions - he managed the conflicts that could arise between these regions by implementing ‘Mulki Rules’. Mulki Rules provide 80% reservation for local people in all recruitments for C and D posts at district level and 60% reservation for local people in Class A and B posts at divisional level. This system ensured that people of the each region got access to opportunities. The Mulki Rules came into existence in 1928.

During the influx after Independence, most of these rules were flouted using fake certificates that gave people of Andhra region a local status. When the people of Telangana realized how Andhra people were able to take up the jobs using these fake certificates, they started a protest called ‘Gair Mulki Go Back!’ [Non-Mulki Go Back]

1952 Hyderabad State Elections

And contrary to the contemporary belief that Telangana was never a state before, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao was elected the Chief Minister of Hyderabad State in 1952. Telangana was part of a state called Hyderabad state in India, before it became a part of Andhra Pradesh against its will.

Creation of Andhra State

While Hyderabad State came into existence on its own which included Telangana only in 1948, Telugu-speaking Andhra region was a part of Madras Presidency. This region became independent on August 15, 1947 along with rest of India as Madras Presidency.

Fearing that most of the newly created jobs and opportunities would be taken up by Tamils since they were more educated and had access to opportunities, Andhra people started a protest. Potti Sriramulu, the leader of this agitation started a ‘hunger strike till death’ on 19^th October 1952. Even though New Delhi surmised that these people could be given a new state with a new capital to take care of academic and government jobs and other economic opportunities, Potti Sriramulu fought for Madras city (now called Chennai) as their capital city. The recommendations given to New Delhi suggested that Madras will belong to Tamils and not to Andhra People. Potti Sriramulu died on 15^th December 1952 after 63 days of fasting.

His actions resulted in formation of First State Reorganization Committee (SRC) which divided the nation along linguistic lines, though Nehru was quite averse to such organization based on language.

New Delhi approved for creation of a new state called Andhra on 1^st October 1953 for the people of Andhra region carved out of erstwhile Madras Presidency.

One of the misconceptions that are flouted nowadays is that Potti Sriramulu fought for a greater and unified Vishalandhra comprising all Telugu people under one state. There is no truth to this. He had in fact fought for extremely local demands for his own people of Andhra region, and not Telangana people.

Prevailing mood before Creation of Andhra Pradesh

Hyderabad State was created in 1948, Andhra was created in 1953. Andhra people won themselves a state but not Madras. Their capital city was an unknown city called Kurnool. They were still scouting for a much needed capital city that can rival Madras. The death of Potti Sriramulu put agitation of Andhra People on the national scene. With the creation of Andhra, legitimacy for creating states on linguistic lines was gaining ground.

The same bystanders from Andhra region, who stood by while Telangana went through Razakar Movement and who later on took up many positions in the Hyderabad state now started to vie for Hyderabad city.

It should be known that Hyderabad was a very famous city in the world already. It was considered the second most important city in the Muslim World where one of the world’s richest men resided. It was known for architecture marvels and international businesses. Hyderabad state was the biggest princely state in India who had direct access to British Crown.

People of Andhra now caught a new slogan to create a new state for all Telugu people, including people of Telangana. The reality had set in New Delhi that creation of states along linguistic lines could not be avoided. During First SRC headed by Fazal Ali, states like Kerala, Madras State (Tamil Nadu), Mysore state (later named to Karnataka), were all created based on linguistic lines. Andhra people vied for Hyderabad and hence whole of Telangana, and campaigned under the slogan that the binding factor was the common language Telugu. Though Telangana was unimpressed by such placatory moves because of the experiences of 1948-52, and though Telangana was least interested in joining Andhra, and though Telangana bitterly opposed it when it came to happen, Andhra prevailed and they were successful in annexing Telangana to form Andhra Pradesh thereby winning the crown jewel Hyderabad.

Another misconception that is flouted now is that First SRC has definitely agreed for creation of Andhra Pradesh from Telangana and Andhra State. That is not the case. In fact, the First SRC clearly makes a case of Telangana. Here are the excerpts from the text:

The Case for Telangana

375. …The considerations which have been argued in favour of a separate Telangana State are, however, not such as may be lightly brushed aside.

376. …some Telangana leaders seem to fear that the result of unification will be to exchange some settled sources of revenue, out of which development schemes may be financed, for financial uncertainty similar to that which Andhra is now faced. Telangana claims to be progressive and from an administrative point of view, unification it is contended is not likely to confer any benefits on this area.

377. When plans for future development are taken into account, Telangana fears that the claims of this area may not receive adequate consideration in Vishalandhra. …does not wish to lose its present independent rights in relation to the utilization of the waters of Krishna and Godavari.

378. One of the principal causes of opposition of Vishalandhra also seems to be the apprehension felt by the educationally backward people of Telangana that they may be swamped and exploited by the more advanced people of the coastal areas. In the Telangana districts outside the city of Hyderabad, education is woefully backward. …while Telangana, itself may be converted into a colony by the enterprising coastal Andhra.

379. ' The Telangana' it has further been argued, can be stable and viable, unit considered by itself.

References: Link 1, Link 2, Link 3, Link 4, Link 5, Link 6, Link 7, Link 8.