Kodandram, the convenor of the Joint Action Committee for Telangana, tells Aditi Phadnis why Telangana should be made a separate state
We are told that you are a man we should be afraid of, that you’re leading a pack that wants to usurp political parties and set up a liberated zone in Telangana.
Certainly not. Telangana has changed quite a bit after the current agitation. As you know, Telangana has seen three decades of violence. In 2001, it was widely decided that the goal of having a separate state could be achieved through the political process. In recognition of this, campaigns were started to educate and mobilise people. Many people thought that organisations carrying out agitations were too critical and feared they would become irrelevant. But the agitation process was rejected, following which these organisations changed their approach and joined the political process.
In 2001, when the Telangana Rashtriya Samiti (TRS) was formed, it gained legitimacy. In 2004, it was accepted in the Lok Sabha elections. For many parties, the statehood became an issue on which they had to take a stand. In 2009, some people thought there was no need to create Telangana. Their seats went down.
But TRS lost. In 2004, it won five Lok Sabha seats. In 2009, it won two. In the Assembly too, its strength fell dramatically. Doesn’t this mean that the idea has been rejected by the people?
The issue was not whether TRS won or lost. The question was what parties were saying on Telangana. All parties were put in a position where they had to say something on the issue. In 2009, barring CPI(M) and the Majlis e Ittehad ul Muslimeen (MIM), everyone said, in one way or another, that they supported a separate state. Some in BJP said they wanted to speed up the process. Others like the Telugu Desam Party struck an alliance with TRS. TRS lost as the alliance did not lead to vote transfer in a way it had expected. The benefit went to the Congress because Telangana votes were divided.
In the current agitation, it is not just political parties that are involved. There are employees’ organisations, students, political activitsts. Even CPI(M) has told us that though it does not support the movement, it will not come in the way. Political parties are not leading the agitation but following the people.
When the government issued its statement on December 9, 2009, that the process would be initiated, people were overjoyed. The agitation subsided.
But the government issued the statement in the full knowledge that a resolution for a separate state would be defeated in the Assembly...
Article 3 of the Constitution spells out the process of forming states. We are happy with whatever procedure the government wants to follow, but we want a clear timeframe.
But the central government did not promise a timeframe in case of Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand and Jharkhand...
The questions related to division of Hyderabad state were different. There were different sets of people who lived in Hyderabad state, which is more or less Telangana now. The Marathis, the Kannadigas, the Muslims, they were all part of Hyderabad’s social and economic elite.
After Hyderabad state joined the Indian Union in 1948, Telangana continued as separate Hyderabad state till its merger with Andhra on November 1, 1956, despite opposition by the people of Telangana.
While having a common language, Andhra and Telangana had cultural and socio-economic differences. The first States Reorganisation Commission report submitted in 1955 referred to these dissimilarities.
‘The educationally backward people of Telangana have apprehensions that they may be swamped and exploited by the more advanced people of the coastal areas’, the report said.
‘The real fear of the people of Telangana is that they will be unequally placed in relation to the major partner, which will derive all the advantages immediately, while Telangana itself may be converted into a colony by coastal Andhra,’ the commission observed.
Ignoring these observations, the then government of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru went ahead with the merger of Hyderabad state with Andhra. However, Telangana was guaranteed certain safeguards through the Gentlemen’s Agreement. This agreement and the six-point formula of 1973, which guaranteed preference to local candidates in jobs, besides accelerated development, was never implemented sincerely
So, Telangana was a state within a state. The political elite of Hyderabad state migrated. The Muslims went to Pakistan, the Marathis and Kanndigas got their own states and left, leaving a vacuum that was filled by leaders from coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions.
All political parties understand the history. But what is your locus standi as you are the convenor of a Joint Action Committee of a movement that has the power to unseat politicians. What is your hold over the politicians? Why do they listen to you?
Because they know how active we’ve been. In 2004, we floated the Telangana Intellectuals Forum. Other groups could not work, but we continued our activities. We had a presence in almost every taluk. We meet as many people as we can, we urge them to follow a political path to Telangana. Politicians know this. That’s why they listen to us.
There’s a strong fear that if Telangana is formed, the Andharites living there will be driven away.
If Marathi and Kannada speaking people lived in Hyderabad without fear, why should the Andhraites be afraid. This movement is different from the 1969 agitation, when the slogan was: All Andhraites should leave Telangana. We don’t say that now. The people of Telangana feel cheated as all assurances given to them have proved to be false. They felt that people of Andhra had not only grabbed their jobs but also diverted their resources, especially water, to Andhra. We’re talking of the 1960s when the state was the only provider of contracts and industrialisation. Andhra’s propertied classes had capital and could make use of the opportunities available then.
What prevented people of Telangana from improving themselves?
These is a myth that people of Telangana are lazy and that is why they are backward. But the fact is that in the absence of an economic and political elite, the people were unable to utilise opportunities.
We want industry to play a major role in Telangana so that its resources can be utilised and its people can get jobs. Nine districts of Telangana are in the list of districts that have the maximum number of farmers’ suicides. This is because while in Coastal Andhra, people get water, in Telangana, irrigation is through borewells. Close to 75 per cent of all borewells in the state are in this region. We met industry in Hyderabad and explained all this to them. They agreed with our position.
