"Is Paris burning?" was a question Hitler had put to his chief of staff Alfred Jodl. He wanted Paris to be destroyed before it fell into the hands of the Allied Forces. Today the title of the post can be a question put to each other by anxious Telugus all over the world.
I am an Andhraite and I am fiercely proud of it. One very if not the most irritating questions that can be put to me is whether or not I am a Tamilian when I say I am a south Indian. And when I say Andhra I do not mean the coastal part that is referred to by that name by some people of Telangana and Rayalaseema. Instead I refer to a united Andhra Pradesh. I am from the city of Visakhapatnam. But I have also stayed in Hyderabad and to me, the city and region of Telangana is as much a part of the state of Andhra Pradesh as any other part of it.
Potti Sriramulu was a freedom fighter and Gandhian who gave up his life so that Andhra Pradesh could be formed. He went on a fast for the formation of a state for the Telugus, separate from the Madras Presidency that was in existence at the time of independence.
Nehru felt that the consolidation of an independent India was more important and he refused to accept the initial requests for the formation of a separate state. Even as Sriramulu's health was deteriorating he steadfastly refused to accept the demand for a new state. Finally after a long fast Sriramulu passed away and then all hell broke loose. A lot of public property was destroyed and quite a few people were killed in police firing. This was the background against which the state of Andhra was formed in 1953 much like India which had its independence marred by communal bloodshed. Later on Hyderabad was liberated from the Nizam's rule and thus in 1956 the present day Andhra Pradesh was formed.
Andhra Pradesh is divided into three broad regions - Telangana (north), Rayalaseema(south) and Kosta (coastal part). There has been some anger in the Telangana region that the region has been unfairly exploited and that people from otside the region have been coming in and taking away the jobs of the locals.
Now we come to the person at the centre of the whole issue, K Chandrasekhara Rao or KCR. He was part of the Telugu Desam Party or TDP, which was founded by N T Rama Rao. NTR is credited with giving the Andhraites a separate identity away from the Madrasi tag that is attached to all south Indians. KCR was part of the first government set up by Chandrababu Naidu. He was not given a ministerial berth in the second government, which was formed in 1999, but was made the Deputy Speaker. In 2001 he quit the party and set up the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS). So I now ask the question, where was Telangana when KCR was part of
the government?
There seemed to have been a broad consensus during the recent Andhra assembly and parliamentary elections about the formation of Telangana. The TRS performed quite badly and the Congress won pretty impressively. The late Chief Minister YSR was against the formation of a separate state. He in fact made a statement that was widely condemned saying that if the TDP-TRS combine came to power people from one part of the state would need a visa to visit another. Yet he was a person that was against the bifurcation of the state for whatever reasons he had. Today had he been present the situation might have been different.
So in my personal opinion the real reason behind the demand for a separate state is suspect. I have heard that if Telangana is formed it will not be KCR but his nephew or someone who will stand for the Chief Minister's post. But then, have we not heard about the concept of the power behind the throne? Also, how many times have puppet CMs not been put in place? The argument is that the region cannot develop as long as it is 'under' Andhra Pradesh and that it is being exploited. I am surprised by the student agitation to be honest. But is bifurcation the answer to all ills? Are there no other means to develop the region? Politicians generally go for solutions that pay immediate political dividends and may genuine interests be damned. Stoking student passions and demanding a separate state is an easy answer. Today there have been protests in Maharashtra about 'outsiders' encroaching on the jobs of the 'locals'. In AP these so-called outsiders are not even from outside the state. If the Maharashtra argument is stupid, the AP argument is beyond stupidity.
The Congress does not want to be seen as a party opposed to the formation of Telangana. In addition to this, fearing a law and order situtation the government has given in to KCR's demand, at least to an extent. If I remember right the Supreme Court had commented on a particular state government's inability to maintain law and order, saying that it was its responsibility and if it could not do so, it could very well resign. But the fact of the matter, do we have leaders who have such spunk in them today?
As I write this, 136 MLAs have resigned from the state legislature and protests have been going on in Rayalaseema and Kosta against the division of the state. The city of Hyderabad is another bone of contention. The argument to make it a UT or a joint capital does not exactly make sense as it is not practical to govern a state from a capital that is quite a distance from the state's border (which is what will happen if AP is bifurcated). The pro-Telangana camp is adamant that Hyderabad has to be part of Telangana. The brand equity of Hyderabad as a safe investment destination might actually come under a cloud now.Now the Congress is caught on two fronts. It cannot reject the demand outright. On the other hand its own MLAs are resigning in protest of the decision.
I personally do not want the division of a state that was meant to provide a separate identity for the Telugus for purely political reasons. The government can declare a special package for the region if it is indeed true that the region has been neglected. What is needed right now is effective leadership and a genuine concern to address the issues facing the region if not the state.
There was an article I once read which mentioned how the Andhraites were experts at dividing themselves into groups. In the US there two separate Telugu associations were formed - Telugu Association of North America (TANA) and American Telugu Association (ATA). The Telugus went all that distance away from their homeland and still found ways to divide themselves. I can but pray the state stays united peacefully and that better sense prevails among all sections of the society.
I am an Andhraite and I am fiercely proud of it. One very if not the most irritating questions that can be put to me is whether or not I am a Tamilian when I say I am a south Indian. And when I say Andhra I do not mean the coastal part that is referred to by that name by some people of Telangana and Rayalaseema. Instead I refer to a united Andhra Pradesh. I am from the city of Visakhapatnam. But I have also stayed in Hyderabad and to me, the city and region of Telangana is as much a part of the state of Andhra Pradesh as any other part of it.
Potti Sriramulu was a freedom fighter and Gandhian who gave up his life so that Andhra Pradesh could be formed. He went on a fast for the formation of a state for the Telugus, separate from the Madras Presidency that was in existence at the time of independence.
Nehru felt that the consolidation of an independent India was more important and he refused to accept the initial requests for the formation of a separate state. Even as Sriramulu's health was deteriorating he steadfastly refused to accept the demand for a new state. Finally after a long fast Sriramulu passed away and then all hell broke loose. A lot of public property was destroyed and quite a few people were killed in police firing. This was the background against which the state of Andhra was formed in 1953 much like India which had its independence marred by communal bloodshed. Later on Hyderabad was liberated from the Nizam's rule and thus in 1956 the present day Andhra Pradesh was formed.
Andhra Pradesh is divided into three broad regions - Telangana (north), Rayalaseema(south) and Kosta (coastal part). There has been some anger in the Telangana region that the region has been unfairly exploited and that people from otside the region have been coming in and taking away the jobs of the locals.
Now we come to the person at the centre of the whole issue, K Chandrasekhara Rao or KCR. He was part of the Telugu Desam Party or TDP, which was founded by N T Rama Rao. NTR is credited with giving the Andhraites a separate identity away from the Madrasi tag that is attached to all south Indians. KCR was part of the first government set up by Chandrababu Naidu. He was not given a ministerial berth in the second government, which was formed in 1999, but was made the Deputy Speaker. In 2001 he quit the party and set up the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS). So I now ask the question, where was Telangana when KCR was part of
the government?
There seemed to have been a broad consensus during the recent Andhra assembly and parliamentary elections about the formation of Telangana. The TRS performed quite badly and the Congress won pretty impressively. The late Chief Minister YSR was against the formation of a separate state. He in fact made a statement that was widely condemned saying that if the TDP-TRS combine came to power people from one part of the state would need a visa to visit another. Yet he was a person that was against the bifurcation of the state for whatever reasons he had. Today had he been present the situation might have been different.
So in my personal opinion the real reason behind the demand for a separate state is suspect. I have heard that if Telangana is formed it will not be KCR but his nephew or someone who will stand for the Chief Minister's post. But then, have we not heard about the concept of the power behind the throne? Also, how many times have puppet CMs not been put in place? The argument is that the region cannot develop as long as it is 'under' Andhra Pradesh and that it is being exploited. I am surprised by the student agitation to be honest. But is bifurcation the answer to all ills? Are there no other means to develop the region? Politicians generally go for solutions that pay immediate political dividends and may genuine interests be damned. Stoking student passions and demanding a separate state is an easy answer. Today there have been protests in Maharashtra about 'outsiders' encroaching on the jobs of the 'locals'. In AP these so-called outsiders are not even from outside the state. If the Maharashtra argument is stupid, the AP argument is beyond stupidity.
The Congress does not want to be seen as a party opposed to the formation of Telangana. In addition to this, fearing a law and order situtation the government has given in to KCR's demand, at least to an extent. If I remember right the Supreme Court had commented on a particular state government's inability to maintain law and order, saying that it was its responsibility and if it could not do so, it could very well resign. But the fact of the matter, do we have leaders who have such spunk in them today?
As I write this, 136 MLAs have resigned from the state legislature and protests have been going on in Rayalaseema and Kosta against the division of the state. The city of Hyderabad is another bone of contention. The argument to make it a UT or a joint capital does not exactly make sense as it is not practical to govern a state from a capital that is quite a distance from the state's border (which is what will happen if AP is bifurcated). The pro-Telangana camp is adamant that Hyderabad has to be part of Telangana. The brand equity of Hyderabad as a safe investment destination might actually come under a cloud now.Now the Congress is caught on two fronts. It cannot reject the demand outright. On the other hand its own MLAs are resigning in protest of the decision.
I personally do not want the division of a state that was meant to provide a separate identity for the Telugus for purely political reasons. The government can declare a special package for the region if it is indeed true that the region has been neglected. What is needed right now is effective leadership and a genuine concern to address the issues facing the region if not the state.
There was an article I once read which mentioned how the Andhraites were experts at dividing themselves into groups. In the US there two separate Telugu associations were formed - Telugu Association of North America (TANA) and American Telugu Association (ATA). The Telugus went all that distance away from their homeland and still found ways to divide themselves. I can but pray the state stays united peacefully and that better sense prevails among all sections of the society.
8 comments:
VC...i completely agree....the formation of AP was based on providing a separate state for the telugus....but what is the basis for the formation of Telangana???
That's another good one from you!
You have rightly said, no one would like to invest in Hyderabad, if the ruckus continues this way...as said by CBN, the efforts he had put to bring hyderabad to what it is now, will go waste!
Also, yes, had YSR been alive, the situation would have been very different, as he is(looking at one side of him), one able leader and dictator, that, no one(KCR, the man behind this rumpus) would dare to try to wag his tail in his presence!!
And last but not the least, the MLA's who have resigned, am definitely sure, are doing all this protest only out of the fear that the value of the lands they possess, in and around Hyderabad, would decline like hell, if the division happens, they don't really have the idea of a United AP :D
Finally, yes, today, its a very ugly situation we are in: shamelessly fighting for the disunion of this beautiful AndhraPradesh!
Would like to add here, some creativity i stole from my friend,
'something called TANDANA would come up now kya?' :P
thse only feasible answer is what you said (to provide a package for telangana without dividing state !)
this link provides a telanganaite's version of separate telangana..
http://www.telangana.org/TelanganaFAQ.asp
Its hard to take a stand one way ... As an outsider , it looks incorrect though I do not know exactly the reasons behind this ... It is incorrect if politically motivated but might be correct if its for administrative reasons or the premise happens to be cultural differences or more or all ... but just happened to stumble by a few articles by Telengana supporters , and it was not easy to deny their logic ...
The only reason given by Telangana supporters for forming the new state is the ignorance of the region by governments over the ages; but isn't that something that happens everywhere, in every state in India? Some places it is quite visible, some places it is not. I don't think getting a separate state status will solve the issues of Telangana. The states of Jharkhand, Chattisgarh and Uttaranchal are yet to capitalise on their advantages and even after 9 years except for some industrialists setting shop; nothing much has happened in these areas. So why should it be different for Telangana?
I was born in the city of Vizag ... and I love the people from Andhra Pradesh ... I hate to see this happening ..
Didn't we (the government and the people of India) have enough problems already that this thing has again cropped up.
If a portion has been ignored from development a separate state doesn't solve the problem .. Look at Jharkhand ... it is India's poorest and most Backward state even after 9 years of coming into being. What has the new leaders who have governed Jharkhand done ?!! They have sucked the coffers dry .. Ala Koda and his ilk.
Also to make a separate state one needs a major difference in the two regions, e.g for Jharkahnd it was understandable as the present jharkhand had an almost different Geo-socio get up ... most of the people were tribal and also it was a plateau region compared to the plains of Bihar. But in this case the people are the same .. they speak the same language ... eat same kind of food and even love the same kind of movies ...
God Save my country ....
Hi all. How are you?
Post a Comment