paper on telngana politics

7/28/2019 Paper on Telngana politics

1/6

Politics in a Problematic Terrain: A Closer Look At Telangana Rastra Samiti

(TRS) in Telangana Region of Andhraprdesh

H.Vageeshan1

To me in these circumstances, the word great (vishaala) seems to have imperialist expansionist connotations Jawahala

Nehru

(Talking to the scribes on the occasion of inauguration of Andhra State on 1-10-1952 reported on local daily 3-5-1952.

Delving in to the history to understand the present and analyzing the past form the

experience of the present, at time becomes imperative to analyze the contemporary

complexities and tragedies. Efforts to build coherence between the people on the

basis of one or other cultural commonality(s), and create a workable common

identity is one such contemporary complex endeavor that has gone unimaginably

wrong. I argue that this effort was to begin with, taken up only on emotive and

concealed political and strategic considerations, keeping away. It was never based

on democratic principles and unsurprisingly it has led to dissention. The basis of this

project of constructing a shared identity was a modern European construct :

linguistic nationalism. . After the demise of old controls of, empires, and the Papacy

the age of enlightenment and reason was ushered in Europe. These new

developments inevitably demanded redefinition of the contours of commonality

which transcend Papacy and empire. This search led to the idea of nationalism in

modern Europe which realigned most of Europe by late 19th century AD. This new

idea has various manifestations like ethno nationalism, linguistic nationalism and so

on. It will not be out of place to say that this construction of commonality is a quite

complex effort which involves interplay of cultural raw material, communication, art

of inclusive and exclusive politics, governance and management of pluralities.

European colonialism took the idea of nationalism to its colonies many a time

unintentionally and at times with intentions. British India is no exception to this rule.

The Idea of linguistic and ethno nationalism in Indian subcontinent is seriously

mediated by the colonial rule and the enlightenment idea it brought with it during

18th and 19th centuries which fructified in early 20th century, yielding nourishing

1

H. Vageesshan is an assistant professor r of political science in NationalAcademy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) University, Hyderabad . Contact :[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/6

crop at times, but also bitter noxious in other cases. Post colonial India has faced the

problem of national building and restructures provinces. For this purpose the readily

available tool was linguistic nationalism. In India It seems to worked well in some

cases, but did not work well in others. People in one such area of unsuccessful

experiment in India ,time and again substantiate their demand ,urge and appeal to aliving constitution to take in to cognizance of the ground realities and remodel

territorial realignment. This is in short is the story of terrine of Telangana and politics

in and around it.

Back ground

When India got independence Telugu people were living in two different political

territories. one in the then United Madras Province (UMP) for almost two centuries

and the other in the Nizams Dominion (Also Known as Hyderabad state) which was

multi lingual state comprising Telugu, Kannada and Marathi speaking zones

respectively . The Telugu lands in the Nizams dominion were known as Telangana.

This Dominion which was a faithful ally to the British since 1857. In 1952 October

Telugus of UMP got separate state as a result of prolonged agitation and deft political

maneuvering. The story was taking a different turn for Telugus in the Nizams

dominions as this state was annexed by the Indian Union on September 17, 1948 by

Indian Union by military operation . Reorganizing the newly acceded multi lingual

territory was a challenge for Indian Union . From 1948 to 1956 Nizams Dominion was

under the rule of Army, civilian administration and under elected government

respectively.

Diversity of Telugus which was mediated by different ruling systems namely the

colonial rule and a native princely rule was an established fact by 1950s. The first

State Reorganization Commission (SRC) expressed its genuine doubts about the

merger of two diverse Telugu territories. The report took cognizance of points raised

by the Mulki Movement between 1954-56 against the merger of Telangana with

Andhra state. The report of the commission weighed the pros and cons of formation of a unified Telugu linguistic state advised to go slow on the issue till the second

assembly elections which were to 1960s. But the Indian Union by 1956 mediated an

agreement between Telugus of two regions and formed Andhra Pradesh by

Novemeber,1, 1956. The roots for the current turmoil lay deep ignoring the advice of

the SRC.


3/6

Blow out and fire fight

Subsequently there was a movement from 1969-71 for separate telangana

( predominantly a students and employees movement) . There had been a legal

battle in courts too to up keep regional safe guards ( Mulki protections) in the

A.P.High Court and Supreme court .In October 1972 Supreme court upheld Mulki

rules which triggered a movement named Jai Andhra. In essence the jai Andhra

movement is opposition to the Mulki rules. It in essence stated after the 1972

judgment that there is no point in living in a unified state if certain nativity rules are

placed against them. Union Government stepped in again and came out with a six

point formula, divided AP in to six zones for the purpose of public employment up to

a certain cadre and put Andhraprdesh together. It seems to careful observers that

union government missed an opportunity look in to the depth of the dissention

between two regions.

Re-emergence

It was 1985 ones again Telangana grievance stated re-emerging being aired now by

the state government employees of Telangana region. The demand for

implementation of zone principles and repatriate the non locals. Later in1992 MP

form the region gave a representation to the then Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao

giving statistics of deprivation in the area of irrigation, education and allocation of

financial resources. By 1992 student groups named as Telagana Students

Organization , Telangana Liberation Front emerged in Osmania University. Somedissenting Intellectuals working with the radical took interest in telagana and in

early 1990s raised issue of telagana from the perspective nationalities. Thus various

groups namely employees, the students, parliamentarians, non parliamentary left

intellectuals started expressing Telagana deprivation in less than two decades after

the Union Governemtn mediated solution of 1973. The re-emergence of Telagana

deprivation and aspiration for separation is coterminous with emergence and

strengthening Telugu Desham Party a non congress state level party and its

ascendency to power in mid 1980s.

Assertion of identity

Telangana had been a hot bed of left leaning political action since 1948.Post

Aandhrapradesh strong Marxist Leninist movement took roots in Telangana in mid

1970. By late 1980s there was a churning in Marxist Leninist groups on the question

of caste. In a nut shell an argument to have a serious look at caste question and


4/6

integrate it in to transformatory revolutionary praxis was highlighted by a few non

upper caste intellectuals in the party circles. Tsunduru and Neerukonda dalit

carnages were immediate reasons for this rethinking. Gender and caste were brought

forth as distinct categories and discrimination on these two grounds on an everyday

basis became a point of serious discourse within the ML camp.Regional disparity alsoadded to the deprived identities soon. Initially the dominant ML intellectuals saw

these arguments as divisive in nature. But the dissenters persisted . In the form of

these dissenters re-emerging Telangana movement of early 1990s got very strong

identity political assertion. In a way the murmurs in few quarters now started

becoming a bit louder. The organizing, disseminating capacity of these dissenting

rebels contributed to the pitch of the Telangana voice.

In 1997 Maroju Veeranna, a dissenting ML activist of Janshakti party broke from the

ranks with a thesis of taking up caste annihilation struggles along with class struggles.

He was instrumental in formation Telagan Mahasabha in Suryapet which gave a call

for the formation with a strong social justice agenda .This was quickly followed by

the then peoples war group with formation of Telangana Jana sabha demanding

Democratic separate telangana. In this manner by late 1990s non parliamentary left

took a lead to voice telangan openly. Ripples of this embolden ment can be seen

formation of a short livedJai Telangana parliamentary political party by a former

home minster P.Indrareddy. At national level BJP was in favour for small states but

never keenly pused rsued telagana cause during this period. It had its own coalition

compulsion with the then ruling telugu desham party. Congress party which was outof power during the period took the issue to the party high command.

Response of the State Government

State government response to the raising Telagana voices ranged from calculatedly

ignoring them to forcefully suppressing them. The state government willfully

neglected to see the facts and figures put forth by the protagonists of telangana. In

state legislative assembly a ruling was given by the then speaker on behalf of the

government not to use the word Telangana on the floor of the house as that word has

strong disintegrating over tone. Officially Telangana word is prohibited as Un

parliamentary ( perhaps also as ani Telugu national) . A party which drummed the

Telugu Pride (telugu atma gouravam) against delhis over lordship in 1982 was

terribly intolerant to listen the utterance of word Telangana officially. The non leftist

voices were muzzled ruthlessly organizers were arrested; balladeers were shot at and

were hacked to death. Partly it was also true these organizations failed to form a


5/6

parliamentary party to express the Telangana voice. They focused more on

dissemination and struggle mode activity than on Party building activity. Voice in the

assembly were ignored and heckled. Non parliamentary voices were hounded by strong

arm tactics .This was the states response and the plight of reemerged phoenix named

telangana. This response can be analysed from the cast class nature of the rulingparty.

Emergence of Telangana Rastra Samithi (TRS)

The movement took in to fold various sections but it was not successful in forming a

political party. Partly this failure can be ascribed to the skepticism of the ultra left about

parliamentary politics and partly to the bitter experience of back tracking of party

espoused the cause. But it was becoming tough for the movement to exist without a

political party. Telangana intellectuals rallied around a seasoned politician

K.Chandrshekar Rao (KCR) by early 2000. He was then an MLA and also deputy

speaker of the State Legislative Assembly. He was the main pro Telangana voice in the

party. Congress leaders who were sympathetic to the cause of Telangana failed to

launch a separate Telangana outfit. Thus, a movement which emerged in mid 1990s

began to search for a leader who could shape a parliamentary party. KCR was convinced

to launch a party. One has to keep in mind that the voice for Telangana of mid-1990s

had a serious socio economic transformation agenda .

In April 2001 Telangana Rashtra Samiti was launched.. Cadres from both left and right

wing parties thronged the party. Since the launching of the party TRS focused onelectoral politics. Its aim was to garner as many seats as possible both legislative and

parliamentary constituencies and then become crucial in formation of governments

both at the state and union level. KCR professed that in the era of coalitions each

parliament seat becomes important hence the aim of TRS is to win more seats. He

quickly steered himself from the politics of the movement and meandered in to electoral

politics. In 2004, TRS had an alliance with congress and was successfully included

formation of Telangana as priority issue in UPA-I governments agenda, but failed to

realize it in real terms. In 2009 TRS was with anti congress front and dwindled in

strength. The party failed to strengthen itself at grassroots. However considering the

odds, it is no mean achievement that the party has kept the issue alive at national and

state-level for the past twelve years.

Movement and Party at cross roads


6/6

The failures of TRS are due to many extraneous factors. The key problem is over

reliance on the politics of lobbying at the center. Its entry in to the union government

was seen as a mistake when analyzed from current state of affairs. It ignored

strengthening of party apparatus deep down. There is serious disjunction between the

aspirations and ideals of the movement and the action of the party. Coordination ismissing between a large umbrella of pro Telangana activists with socio economic

transformation agenda and TRS with its the political agenda. Added to this problem

party is fast turning family fiefdom. It is time for the party and the movement to come

tighter and re-engineer strategies and tactics to achieve the goal of Telangana state

which is a genuine democratic demand.

paper on telngana politics

Documents