POSTURING FOR POLITICAL SPACE

Two-nation theory that was touted to be the only panacea for the communal pitch that was raised by the Muslim League prior to the disastrous partition of India already proved to be just a tool in the hands of the communalists to divide the nation. Mohammed Ali Jinnah’s pet theme was that Hindus and Moslems could not co-exist for their cultural, civilisational and linguistic backgrounds are entirely different.
What is the position today? People who were sharing the same cultural, civilisational background were divided. India which has the second largest Muslim population in the world has become the homeland for both the Hindus and Muslims and they are in a state of peace and tranquillity, calling the bluff of Jinnah, notwithstanding occasional disturbances here and there which should be understood given the historical factors not devoid of mutual hostility.

In contrast, post-Independence leaders in India thought, though Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was not so keen, that language could be the uniting factor and hence the formation of states on linguistic basis came into existence in 1956. Just a decade after this experiment, some leaders thought that language could not be the deciding factor to keep the people united and they queered the pitch citing history of the region. That it was not genuine was proved when the demand was given up when those who were spearheading the movement were politically compensated.

Now, the same political class with a “bulgy” nose for political gains wants to divide the people and to prove that language cannot be the basis for uniting people. Praising the Nizams who unleashed Razakars on the people of the state, they would like to go back in history to decide the geography of the state turning, in the process, both Sardar Patel and Potti Sreeramulu in their graves. If Telangana state has to be formed because it existed as a separate state before the integration, what about the composite Madras State that was there till 1953. Can we afford to go back in history and restore those districts in Andhra, Karnataka, Kerala and Orissa to the Madras State? What KCR and his cronies have to understand is that history cannot be re-visited and cannot be re-written.

Ironically, Telugus who paved the way for formation of states based on language, it is feared, may become catalysts for undoing this concept which worked well for 53 years. But, is it that simple?

There are doubts whether the agitations by both separatists and integrationists are spontaneous though the chief minister may think otherwise. If there is no “live” telecast of the agitation for a week, there will be no “immolation” attempts, no one will climb the cell towers. Because media has become an active player in the agitational politics, an impression, should we say illusion, has been created that there is spontaneous upsurge. Had there really been sentiment among the people of Telangana, they would not have kept quiet for two decades which saw four chief ministers from Telangana ruling the state. They have effectively called the bluff of KCR in such a manner that it forced him to take to brinkmanship.

If we look at the timeline that led to the present state of the sponsored turmoil, it becomes clear that every politician, cutting across party lines, is posturing for political space.

Just before TRS leader K Chandrasekara Rao, who had mere 10 members in his legislature kitty and who shied away from GHMC polls, decided to undertake fast-unto-death, a majority of the Congress legislators was plumping for JaganMohan Reddy to become the chief minister and there was no division on regional lines within the party. All those who were loyal to late YSR stood by his son solidly. Even during the pro-T agitation, there were no apparent fissures.

However, all hell broke loose with Union Home Minister Chidambaram’s mid-night announcement. With an impression gaining ground that there is some possibility of T-dream becoming a reality, every legislator wanted to protect his/her political space in the absence of dynamic leadership in the party. If Congress leaders like Sabita Indra Reddy, Jeevan Reddy, Komatreddy Venkat Reddy, who owe their present position to the late YSR, switched their loyalties, it is not because they have turned against YSR legacy, but, in the absence of a strong leader like YSR, there is no one to protect their interests. If they fail to take pro-T stand, KCR would have emerged as the sole champion of Telangana cause. To avert such a possibility Telangana Congress leaders had to resort to political posturing and to hijack the T cause. And that is what we witness today when Sabita Reddy has a soft corner for T-agitators and Jeevan Reddy shouts at the top of his hoarse voice citing distorted history for his stand. Posturing is a sort of political insurance just in case T-state becomes a reality.

Same is the case with Andhra/Rayalaseema Congress leaders. Lagatapati Rajagopal is shrewd enough to see the crisis of leadership in the party after September 2. He wants to seize this opportunity provided jointly by KCR and Chidambaram to emerge as a leader in the coastal districts just in case there is no escape from a division of the state. Or even, if the state remains united, he wants to stand up and be counted.

While one cannot rule out the possibility of Rayapati and Kavuri joining the Lagatapati bandwagon to form a powerful Kamma lobby which lost its political initiative and influence after YSR’s ascendency, one has to understand the emergence of JC Diwakar Reddy and Jagan Mohan Reddy as leaders of the “Samaikya Andhra” movement not to leave the entire political space to Kamma lobby.

Therefore, while headless Congress is pushing individual legislators in Telangana to protect their political space and to ensure electoral dividends, it is a fight between two communities in Andhra/Rayalaseema to fill the void created by the sudden disappearance of YSR from the scene.

The same dilemma is haunting both Telugu Desam and Praja Rajyam Party. If Nagam Janardhana Reddy and Erran Naidu are in the opposite camps, it is not because they have ceased to be loyal to the party leadership. They are only protecting the interests of the party in both the regions.

Posturing for political space can be a temporary phenomenon and one can read through it. But the collateral damage is going to be quite serious and alarming. Pro-T agitators are not confining to politics. They are spreading the divisive mindset to other spheres as well. It started with film industry and now there is talk of extending to business as well. Some T leaders issue ominous warning that if pro-U leaders try to tour Telangana districts, their legs would be broken. Unfortunately, in order to sustain their vested interests, these leaders are prepared to divide the people on socio-political and economic grounds.

The only silver lining amidst these dark clouds is the independence with which the Police is functioning in the state. It is not that the Police force has suddenly become efficient. There is no real political boss to make them function in a partisan manner. Some solace indeed!

TELANGANA AGITATION - TELUGU MEDIA'S ACTIVIST ROLE

Dr Marri Channa Reddy might have been lucky to have had two stints as the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, while at the same time, he was quite unlucky, if one believes in the concept of luck that is, when he led a violent agitation in the late sixties for separate statehood for Telangana. Though Reddy’s agitation took the lives of hundreds of students ruining the academic career of thousands, Dr Reddy did not achieve his goal.

Was it because he was an inefficient leader? Far from it. He was a most dynamic leader of his time, political strategist, not one with his tongue firmly placed in his cheek, steady and full of fire. He might have had some weaknesses, but hypocrisy is not one among them. In a way, he is just the antonym of the TRS chief K Chandrasekara Rao.

Why then did Reddy fail though it is too early to say about the success or failure of KCR?

In the late sixties there were no television channels to give live coverage of all the events big or small. There was only Deccan Chronicle group which also published Andhra Bhoomi from Hyderabad. Telugu dailies like Andhra Prabha or Andhra Patrika or Andhra Jyoti were being published either from Chennai or Vjayawada. There was no gully-to-gully coverage of events, nor were there mini supplements for each and every district and for different regions in the metro to give extensive coverage to the agitation. That is why, chief minister Rosaiah has expressed his concern over the “over-enthusiasm of the media” (Athi Uthsaham) in covering the present agitation.
So, KCR is very lucky, unlike his preceding agitator, to have nearly 15 television channels covering every “act” of the agitation “live” as if nothing else is happening in the world. Additionally, we have nine Telugu dailies which might have combined readership of atleast three crores, not only providing oxygen to the agitation, but fanning the fire as well.

Switch on any Telugu news channel at any point of time, you will find someone, never mind his political status, base or credibility, will be giving a lecture, those days of short bytes of 15/20secs duration are gone, ventilating his demand. The lectures would be repetition galore.

So long as KCR was in Khammam government hospital, the demand was for his shift to Warangal or Hyderabad. Once he was brought to Hyderabad, the demand was for Sonia to make a statement. This only confirmed the perception of atleast a section of the Congressmen that Rosaiah is an ineffective leader. Rosaiah was not in the reckoning even for the ordinary workers.

Press conferences from Telangana Bhavan are “live” whenever they take place irrespective of who addressed the press meet. As a result, even the grass root level worker of the TRS was hogging the limelight.

By thrusting the mike on anyone and everyone found among a group of agitators, the channels were only spreading rumours about KCR’s health. Every one who had a pink shirt or khandwa was interviewed for the non-stop coverage and their only talking point would be a warning to the state government or outbursts against “Andhra officers”. The word “Andhra” became a pejorative term. It was taken to ridiculous proportions when TRS MLAs attributed motives to the doctors at Khammam hospital because they were perceived to be from Andhra region. Such divisive statements went on air unchallenged by the media. There was no time for the media to do very simple verification of facts as they were otherwise busy in “ live” coverage of agitation from as many spots as possible so that there was extensive coverage to provoke people in the name of “sentiment”. No channel had the time to tell the viewer as to what happened to the “sentiment” at the time of general elections and when KCR decided to stay away from the GHMC polls.

Though the government was found napping in the initial days, it started issuing health bulletins and the director of NIMS would say that KCR’s condition was stable. But neither the activists nor the reporters would pay any heed to those bulletins. They would come back to their own conclusion that KCR’s health has deteriorated and that if something happens to him, the entire state would be on fire.

Channels were also spreading “lies” that KCR slipped into coma through the bytes of man on the street. It was nothing but professional stupidity for a reporter to ask a bystander about KCR’s health even after relaying the official health bulletins. A reporter asked the NIMS director what would happen to KCR after two days. Probably, he wanted the director to say that it may worsen so that it becomes a sensational headline and thus provoke the agitators. Look at this gem of a script from an anchor: KCR PARISTHITHI ANDOLAKARNGA MAROCHCHANI KONDARU NAMBDUTHUNNARU.

Yet another straight provocation came from a reporter on the OU campus on Monday. Even as the Police were preparing themselves to evict the students from the campus, the reporter goes live to say that the government brought officers from Andhra and Rayalaseema regions to sabotage the students movement. The OU campus was described as “war zone”. Rapid Action Force does not belong to a region. Either it was sheer ignorance on the part of the reporting staff or pure malice.

Almost all the activists who were before the camera were just issuing threats that if a bill for separate Telangana was not introduced before 10th, entire state would be set on fire. Not satisfied with this, some even said that they won’t hesitate to kill people from the coast. It was absolutely unprofessional and irresponsible for the channels to air the bytes of bystanders especially when they were instigating violence. No channel was an exception to this unjournalistic conduct.

What stood as a pleasantly sharp contrast to the Telugu dailies (each daily was carrying atleast 50 pix everyday) and channels reportage was the coverage by English dailies published from Hyderabad. There was no attempt to sensationalise the events. On the contrary, one could notice the efforts to put things in perspective. Deccan Chronicle was the first daily to report the possible support the agitators were getting from Maoists, for which there was a protest in front of the office of the daily and burning of the effigy of its proprietor.

Times of India (Hyderabad) was another daily whose resident editor, Kingshuk Nag came out with a perspective piece (Is KCR riding a tiger he cannot get off?) Having lost his relevance in AP’s political firmament, KCR was trying to get his relevance back. This was the thrust of the story. He was on the dot when he compared KCR with Raju character in RK Narayan’s novel “Guide”. Though some may consider it uncharitable to KCR, it was nevertheless bold journalism.

New Indian Express resident editor GS Vasu also wrote an edit page article pointing out the mistakes committed by KCR in the past and stating that the police brutality on the Osmania University campus might come to his rescue to regain his lost credibility.

The television coverage of the Telangana agitation should be a case study for those who take to media research. It also highlights the urgent need for Broadcast Regulator. Television, as a mass medium, can play an extraordinary role in reaching the masses at the grass root level, especially when there is a tremendous growth in the number of channels. What is needed is less sensationalism with an eye on TRPs, and more objective and analytical coverage of events. Will they rise to the occasion?