Clamour for Telangana is a manifestation of demands by politically unrepresented castes. A fervent desire for change is sweeping the nation. That is what pitch-forked Arvind Kejriwal to power in Delhi. It also accounts for Narendra Modi’s huge popularity. Andhra Pradesh chief minister Kiran Reddy, attempting a Kejriwal encore, sat on dharna in New Delhi, bringing to sharp focus the Telangana issue.
While prima facie Reddy demonstrated an anti-establishment stance, he is really not fighting for change. On the contrary, he is in favour of status quo. His remonstration that this was the first time a state was being partitioned against the wish of the legislative assembly implied that division of Andhra Pradesh was against the collective will of the people. Reddy’s assertions are at best rhetorical.
Sonia Gandhi’s desire to divide AP is undoubtedly based on anticipated political gains for Congress, but the rationale for bifurcating the state is deeper. The creation of AP after Independence was based on the prevailing idea that language was the basis of homogeneous culture. This was at best a simplistic explanation as subsequent developments surrounding the Telangana agitation showed.
Following the state’s creation on linguistic lines, people from the Andhra region dominated most fields because they had access to English education and economic might, which was the result of agricultural prosperity. Agricultural advancement in turn produced surplus wealth, turning the Andhra folks entrepreneurial. On the other hand, with little or no access to English education under the Nizams, the people of Telangana, bearing the burden of an exploitative zamindari system, lagged behind.
Seemandhra region accounts for a greater share of Lok Sabha and assembly seats, with as many as 23 parliamentary constituencies, while Telangana constitutes 19. Seemandhra legislators dominated over their Telangana counterparts, which also explains why the resolution for the creation of a separate state failed to pass the legislative test.
As a breakaway region from the erstwhile Madras state, Andhra had no major cities. Following AP’s creation, droves of people from that region flocked to Hyderabad. Although the Nizam’s state was economically backward, Hyderabad was blessed with modern infrastructure. The demographic void created by the migration of a large number of affluent Muslims in the wake of Hyderabad’s annexation to the Indian Union turned the Andhra drive into the city effortless.
A clash of cultures erupted as Seemandhra folks exercised political and economic domination over the people of Telangana. No wonder that the first movement for a separate Telangana state boiled over in 1969, barely 13 years after the formation of AP. Indira Gandhi crushed the movement with a heavy hand.
While the Telangana movement would rear its head three decades later, in the interim the political leadership of AP did nothing to create an integrated culture, allowing the regional chasm to accentuate. Power too remained concentrated in the hands of higher castes. While Reddys dominated Congress, Kammas ruled the roost in TDP, with the two parties alternately holding the reins of power.
Across AP, Brahmins constitute less than 1% of the population, with the Reddys (10%) and Kammas (5%) at the top of the social ladder. These higher castes, enjoying the benefits of higher education and entrepreneurship, propelled themselves economically and politically. While Dalits and Kapus (an intermediate caste) played second fiddle in Congress, OBCs were relegated to a similar position in TDP.
As the country took the path to liberalisation in 1991, Hyderabad turned into an international tech city. The Reddys and the Kammas who owned large companies and controlled the real estate market, dominated its business. Political dominance followed economic supremacy: today, top politicians, like Congress MP Lagadapati Rajagopal, founder of Lanco Group, a power company, have huge business interests in Hyderabad. Needless to say, Rajagopal is among some of the most strident voices against the creation of Telangana.
The rise of intermediate castes to power in AP followed a pattern similar to other parts of the country. Capitalising on this phenomenon Telugu superstar Chiranjeevi, a Kapu, formed the Praja Rajyam party in 2009. But he was outmanoeuvered because of political inexperience and a businessman-like approach to politics. Praja Rajyam merged with Congress, leaving the politically weaker castes deprived. At a deeper level, the demand for Telangana is also the manifestation of these politically unrepresented castes. Some of them have, however, become economically and educationally empowered.
Contrary to Kiran Reddy’s claims, large sections of the population in Seemandhra are indifferent to AP’s division. Many see an opportunity as they see the levers of politics passing to intermediate castes. Others see greater economic opportunities in a smaller state.
If Congress sees immediate electoral gains in Telangana BJP, without whose support the proposed state cannot be a reality, too prefers to make the most of the situation. While wholeheartedly supporting the demand for Telangana in its earlier avatar as the Jana Sangh, BJP now wants to stall its creation.
Narendra Modi has set his sights on Delhi and to achieve that end he is cozying up to pro-status quo forces in AP. But can a pro-change agent don a no-change mantle? That is the sixty-four-million dollar question.
No comments:
Post a Comment