Sub-regional assertions for autonomy and statehood in India are
always viewed with suspicion. Even academics see them as parochial
movements with potential threats to national integration. Such approach
prevents us from studying the statehood movements in all its dimensions.
This treatise looks at the nature and the socio-economic context of the
movement for statehood.
Telangana was part of the princely state of Hyderabad. The Union
hovernment integrated Hyderabad state into the Indian Union after an
armed action popularly known as the police action in 1948. In 1956,
Andhra Pradesh was created by combining Telangana with Andhra state
which was a part of the Madras Presidency until 1953.
States Reorganisation
The people of Telangana were against integration with the Andhra
State. The reasons for the opposition were listed out by the States
Reorganisation Commission (SRC), headed by Fazal Ali: "One principal
cause of opposition to Vishalandhra" according to the SRC report "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 coastal areas." Therefore, the Commission recommended that
Telangana should be allowed to continue as a separate entity.
In spite of the recommendations made in the SRC report, Congress
leaders from coastal Andhra continued their demand for Vishalandhra not
only to satisfy the Telugu sentiments but to resolve the economic
problems faced by the Andhra state. Vishalandhra was envisaged to "solve
the difficult and vexing problem of finding a permanent capital for
Andhra." Another advantage was that "if independent political
jurisdiction, namely that of Telangana, can be eliminated, the
formulation and implementation of plans in the eastern areas in these
two great river basins (Krishan and Godavari) will be greatly
expedited." It was also felt that the "existing state of Andhra has
likewise no coal but will be able to get its supplies from Singereni
(located in the Telangana region)."
In view of economic gains involved, the Andhra leaders not only
supported Vishalandhra but also actively pursued it. In the beginning,
the central leadership was not in favour of Vishalandhra. In October
1953, Nehru criticised the idea of Vishalandhra as bearing a tint of
"expansionist imperialism". But subsequently he changed his views due to
pressure from the leaders of the Andhra region. Andhra region was
actively involved in the national movement. Hence the Congress leaders
from the region had strong ties with the national leaders. They used
their contacts to persuade Nehru to accept the demand for Vishalandhra.
The struggle for representative government led by the Hyderabad
State Congress in the erstwhile Hyderabad state remained outside the
national movement. In fact, the Hyderabad State Congress was not part of
the Indian National Congress. Therefore the Congress leaders from
Hyderabad had only tenuous contacts with the national leaders. After the
Central government took a firm decision to form Vishalandhra, the
protagonists of the separate state could not continue their battle any
further as Chenna Reddy, a prominent leader of the Hyderabad State
Congress, and a staunch separatist, admitted, "Nehru's stature loomed
large. It was difficult to oppose him. Now we believe that we had made a
mistake. Had we insisted for a separate state without fear, it would
have emerged." Thus Vishalandhra was formed through manipulation with
the active involvement of the Central government. There were widespread
protests in Telangana against the decision to merge Telangana with the
Andhra State.
Experiments with the Regional Committee
Under these circumstances to placate the opposition to
Vishalandhra in the Telangana region, leaders of the Andhra state
offered certain safeguards through an agreement known as the Gentlemen's
Agreement. Among other things, it assured that "for the Telangana there
will be a regional standing committee of the state assembly belonging
to that region -legislation relating to specified matters will be
referred to the regional committee."
The Regional Committee failed because "more powerful men from the
Andhra area now dominated the political scene and the Telangana leaders
had to play the supporting role." There was little scope for any
independent leadership from Telangana. The political articulation of
various groups of Telangana and their relationship with the political
institutions at the state level was mediated by forces outside the
region. In this political process, the Regional Committee could not
operate as an autonomous body.
Power wielded by the Andhra leaders is not an individual
attribute. It is an outcome of the socio-economic processes. Well
organised and articulate elite emerged in Andhra region from the
mid-nineteenth century onwards as a consequence of the growth of
irrigation, development of modern education system, rise of modern
political institutions and social reform movements. On the contrary,
oppressive political institutions prevented social transformation in the
Telangana region. "What have been merged are not merely two regions but
two different, incompatible systems and historical experiences." It is
in this historical context that elite of the Andhra region could
establish its hegemony over the state. The safeguards guaranteed by the
Gentlemen's Agreement could not offer any protection to the Telangana
region.
In a third world country like India, the state is actively
involved in building a modern society. The groups, that could
appropriate the resources allotted by the state for development, emerged
during the last fifty years as the most powerful groups. These
processes widened the regional inequalities in Andhra Pradesh.
It was in this context that the movement for a separate state
originated in 1968 led by students and government employees. The Central
government resolved the crisis by changing the leadership. But the
demands of the region remained unfulfilled. Subsequently, bowing down to
the pressures from Coastal Andhra region, the Centre has abolished all
the safeguards guaranteed through the Gentlemen's Agreement. The
Regional Committee provided a platform to voice protest if not to secure
justice. Even that small space to ventilate their grievances was lost.
Internal colony:
By establishing hegemony over the state, Andhra elites could
divert the resources to their region. Telangana is thus converted into
an internal colony as a result of the economic development process
pursued by the successive governments. Its resources are diverted and
utilised for the development of the other regions. The major grievances
of Telangana centre around water and irrigation, employment and culture.
Irrigation policies pursued by the state government illustrate
the discrimination towards Telangana. In the first plan prepared by the
erstwhile Hyderabad government, nine projects were proposed for
irrigating 38 lakh acres in all of Hyderabad state. Out of this, the
Telangana region would have got about 26 lakh acres. If the Hyderabad
state were to continue, all the schemes constructed would have diverted
nearly 1,000 thousand million cubic feet (tmc) of Krishna and Godavari
water to irrigate the fields in Telangana. But today as per the records,
the region gets hardly 277 tmc of water. In reality, it is far less. In
fact, the benefits of major irrigation have gone to coastal Andhra. The
total area under canal irrigation in the entire Telangana region is
much less than the area irrigated under canals in Guntur district alone.
Due to neglect, tanks the backbone of Telangana agriculture
deteriorated. The net area irrigated under tanks in the Telangana region
has gone down from 4.47 lakh hectares to 1.26 lakh hectares between
1955-56 and 2004-05. As a consequence, farmers in Telangana region spend
huge amounts to dig bore wells. Nearly 80 per cent of the area
irrigated in the Telangana region is under wells/bore-wells. Unable to
recover the investment incurred to dig wells, many farmers have
committed suicides. Many continue to do so.
In public employment, several government orders concerning local
reservations are violated leading to discrimination towards Telangana.
Article 371-D inserted through Thirty Second Amendment Act of 1973
empowers the President of India to issue orders providing for equitable
opportunities for people belonging to different parts of the state. The
President issued an order in 1975 introducing local reservations. The JM
Girglani Commission, appointed by the government of Andhra Pradesh in
2001 to study the implementation of local reservations, recorded 18
different kinds of violations of the local reservations, specifically in
the Telangana region.
Similarly the culture of Telangana region is suppressed and
discriminated by the mass media, films and text books over which the
control of the Andhra elites is complete. Andhra elites also used
control over the state machinery to secure contracts and acquire land in
and around Hyderabad. Vast areas of land have been acquired in and
around Hyderabad violating land laws, thanks to their access to power.
It explains their reluctance to leave Hyderabad.
The movement for separate statehood seeks to articulate the
demand for a fair share in the resources. It is an outcome of injustice
meted out to the region by successive governments in Andhra Pradesh.
Formation of Telangana state is seen as the only answer to these
grievances.
The Sri Krishna Committee noted that the "Telangana movement can
be interpreted as a desire for greater democracy and empowerment within a
political unit. As stated earlier, sub-regionalism is a movement which
is not necessarily primordial but is essentially modern - in the
direction of a balanced and equitable modernisation. Our analysis shows
that cutting across caste, religion gender and other divisions, the
Telangana movement brings a focus on the development of the region as a
whole, a focus on rights and access to regional resources and further,
it pitches for a rights-based development perspective whereby groups and
communities put forth their agendas within a larger vision of equitable
development." (P.413)
Present Scenario
Since all the political parties as well as the administrative
machinery is dominated by the Andhra lobbies, there is no space for the
people of the Telanagana region in the political arena to articulate
their grievances. In view of this situation the movement for statehood
always emerged outside the political arena in the realm of civil
society. It originated due to the efforts made by the middle class
intellectuals and social activists. Political leaders responded to the
demand only after the movement gained wide support from the people. The
present phase of the movement led by various civil society groups
started in 1989 and intensified since 1996. Telangana Rashtra Samithi
(TRS) was formed only in 2001, after the movement gained strength. It
has given political expression to the movement. The civil society groups
are active even now without joining the TRS, enabling mobilisation of
different sections of the society into the movement. Those who are not
willing to associate with any political party find non-party forums as
useful vehicles for joining the movement.
Yet the Congress party heading the UPA is not able to deliver a
decision on the issue. The party seems to be more concerned about the
support from the Andhra elites rather than the aspirations of the
Telangana people. This delay in fulfilling the promise made to the
Telangana people led to many suicides. Until now, more than 1000 youths
of Telangana have died in desperation. Some of them died in public in
front of the media by setting themselves on fire. Most of them left
behind detailed suicide notes, clearly blaming the government and naming
some political leaders. These suicides are a direct consequence of the
failure of the democratic process.
The Government of India has delayed the process of formation of
the Telangana state and its terrible cost is evident - human loss,
economic damage and loss of credibility for the political decision
making process. This is not the feature of good governance and would
bear consequences in the long run for the nation.
The writer is a professor in political science at Osmania
University, Hyderabad. He is also the chairman of the all-party
Telangana Political Joint Action Committee (T-JAC) which fights for a
separate Telangana state.
No comments:
Post a Comment