The Unending story of Hyderabad State
Syed Ali Mujtaba
The annexation of the Princely state of Hyderabad which took place amidst high drama on 17th September 1948 continues to hog limelight even today. Every year the communal forces in Hyderabad rake up this issue of the ‘Liberation Day’ to tease the Muslim community which is now in its third generation.
Normally, this day is celebrated quietly in party headquarters but this time it was planned at differently. This is because it was the first Telangana Liberation Day after formation of separate Telangana state. The Telegu Rashtriya Samiti (TRS) government which currently rules the new state had rejected the demand of the BJP and the Communist parties to officially celebrate the day.
However, communal forces tried to breach the peace. Tension prevailed at the Golconda Fort as police arrested some activists of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) trying to hoist the national flag to celebrate Telangana Liberation Day on September 17.
The TRS government had denied permission to the BJP to unfurl the national flag at the historic fort. Police prevented BJP workers from entering the fort with the national flag and foiled the attempt to spread communal hatred in the city.
The response from the BJP leader Kishan Reddy, was pithy to this. In an obvious reference to Muslims of Hyderabad, he said that "Telengana Chief Minister should decide whether he wants razakars or people of Telangana."
This statement was rebutted by the Telangana Joint Action Committee (TJAC), which fought for the new Telangana state cautioned the people
against those who were trying to distort the Deccan history and make September 17, an issue to spread communal hatred. It called upon people to observe the day as merger to Indian union and not view as victory of people of one faith over those of other and give it a communal color.
It was on September 17, 1948 that then princely state of Hyderabad merged with the Indian Union following the ‘police action’ of the Indian army against Nizam's army and Razakars' (volunteers) came to an end. There are some people in Hyderabad who still recall the terror unleashed by Razakars and thugs like Qasim Rizvi and they say their atrocities were unimaginable.
There is no denying the fact that the razakars or volunteers which sprung up from nowhere in the high noon of princely states in India to defend the Nizam’s rule in Hyderabad was quite a menace. However all the Muslims of Hyderabad were not razakars. There were Muslims in all sorts of organizations that were present at that time. A large of Muslims had nothing to do with the developments of the princely state and they were mere fence sitters.
The statement of BJP leader Kishan Reddy, equating Razakar with Muslims is nothing but hate mongering. What he actually was trying was sowing communal seeds and brainwashing the current generation by making such outlandish statements. It is such kind of people who are poising the minds of current generation that should be dealt with utmost firmness.
The stories what Razakars did and the revenge carried out against them after the fall of Hyderabad are equally chilling. The Sunderlal report is testimony to these fact (http://www.countercurrents.org/mujtaba290913.htm) At this point of time what purpose does it serve debating whether the atrocities of razakars or that of the Indian army were gorier. How can we grade those crimes, the crime of razakars or the Indian army, who scored over whom?
Does such debate serve any purpose in 2014? We should bury all these tales as dead. History good or bad is behind us and there is no purpose to glorify its wrongs. In the general good of the society anything that disturbs communal peace should never be encouraged.
The last ruler of Hyderabad Mir Osman Ali Khan was a person born to rule a kingdom. He was like any ruler of the 565 Princely states that existed in the country. Many say, Nizam VII was a secular ruler who extended financial aid to many Hindu temples. However, there were forces that were working against him during the end of his rule and he tried to cling on to power as long as colonial ruler presided over his suzerainty.
The seventh Nizam was actually a ceremonial head of the biggest princely state of India who had all responsibilities but no powers. He had long ago lost all his powers of governance to the British residency stationed in Hyderabad.
Some allege that during the last days of his rule, he was financing the Razakars. This is a controversial point and historians agree to disagree on this.
The princely ruler’s entire life should not be judged with his conduct of last days of rule that was engaged to prevent its fall. In a sense of desperation 1945, the ruler even contemplated buying Goa from the Portuguese and wanted Muslim population of Hyderabad to shift to Goa. If this would have happened the act of Muhammad bin Tuglak may have been repeated.
However, the Muslims of Hyderabad whom the BJP leader has calls as razakars refused to entertain any such idea and wanted to live and die in Hyderabad. A similar comment about Indian Muslims is made by Narendra Modi, the current ruler of the country.
A caveat to this development was the incident of 1932, when Muslim league leader Mohmmad Ali Jinnah came to meet him in Hyderabad. The ruler shouted at the top of his voice and asked ‘Qaid’ to leave at once and not to show his face. Obviously he did not like to entertain any separatist ideas.
It is another story the same ruler in 1947, transferred 10,07,940 pounds sterling and nine shillings in the name of then Pakistan high commissioner in London H.I. Rahimtoola in the National Westminster Bank, which is now called Royal Bank of Scotland.
India raised an objection to the transfer, saying the Nizam was not an independent ruler and prevailed upon the bank to freeze the account. Since then the matter is hanging fire. The money is now estimated to have multiplied to 30 million pounds (Rs.3 billion).
There are many tales to tell about the princely rule of Hyderabad but to wrap this discussion, in the interest of the society, sometimes it’s better to forget past history and build a future where each one can live in perfect harmony with their religion, caste and creed intact.
--
Syed Ali Mujtaba is a journalist based in Chennai. He can be contacted at syedalimujtaba@yahoo.com
Syed Ali Mujtaba
The annexation of the Princely state of Hyderabad which took place amidst high drama on 17th September 1948 continues to hog limelight even today. Every year the communal forces in Hyderabad rake up this issue of the ‘Liberation Day’ to tease the Muslim community which is now in its third generation.
Normally, this day is celebrated quietly in party headquarters but this time it was planned at differently. This is because it was the first Telangana Liberation Day after formation of separate Telangana state. The Telegu Rashtriya Samiti (TRS) government which currently rules the new state had rejected the demand of the BJP and the Communist parties to officially celebrate the day.
However, communal forces tried to breach the peace. Tension prevailed at the Golconda Fort as police arrested some activists of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) trying to hoist the national flag to celebrate Telangana Liberation Day on September 17.
The TRS government had denied permission to the BJP to unfurl the national flag at the historic fort. Police prevented BJP workers from entering the fort with the national flag and foiled the attempt to spread communal hatred in the city.
The response from the BJP leader Kishan Reddy, was pithy to this. In an obvious reference to Muslims of Hyderabad, he said that "Telengana Chief Minister should decide whether he wants razakars or people of Telangana."This statement was rebutted by the Telangana Joint Action Committee (TJAC), which fought for the new Telangana state cautioned the people
against those who were trying to distort the Deccan history and make September 17, an issue to spread communal hatred. It called upon people to observe the day as merger to Indian union and not view as victory of people of one faith over those of other and give it a communal color.
It was on September 17, 1948 that then princely state of Hyderabad merged with the Indian Union following the ‘police action’ of the Indian army against Nizam's army and Razakars' (volunteers) came to an end. There are some people in Hyderabad who still recall the terror unleashed by Razakars and thugs like Qasim Rizvi and they say their atrocities were unimaginable.There is no denying the fact that the razakars or volunteers which sprung up from nowhere in the high noon of princely states in India to defend the Nizam’s rule in Hyderabad was quite a menace. However all the Muslims of Hyderabad were not razakars. There were Muslims in all sorts of organizations that were present at that time. A large of Muslims had nothing to do with the developments of the princely state and they were mere fence sitters.
The statement of BJP leader Kishan Reddy, equating Razakar with Muslims is nothing but hate mongering. What he actually was trying was sowing communal seeds and brainwashing the current generation by making such outlandish statements. It is such kind of people who are poising the minds of current generation that should be dealt with utmost firmness.
The stories what Razakars did and the revenge carried out against them after the fall of Hyderabad are equally chilling. The Sunderlal report is testimony to these fact (http://www.countercurrents.org/mujtaba290913.htm) At this point of time what purpose does it serve debating whether the atrocities of razakars or that of the Indian army were gorier. How can we grade those crimes, the crime of razakars or the Indian army, who scored over whom?
Does such debate serve any purpose in 2014? We should bury all these tales as dead. History good or bad is behind us and there is no purpose to glorify its wrongs. In the general good of the society anything that disturbs communal peace should never be encouraged.
The last ruler of Hyderabad Mir Osman Ali Khan was a person born to rule a kingdom. He was like any ruler of the 565 Princely states that existed in the country. Many say, Nizam VII was a secular ruler who extended financial aid to many Hindu temples. However, there were forces that were working against him during the end of his rule and he tried to cling on to power as long as colonial ruler presided over his suzerainty.
The seventh Nizam was actually a ceremonial head of the biggest princely state of India who had all responsibilities but no powers. He had long ago lost all his powers of governance to the British residency stationed in Hyderabad.
Some allege that during the last days of his rule, he was financing the Razakars. This is a controversial point and historians agree to disagree on this.
The princely ruler’s entire life should not be judged with his conduct of last days of rule that was engaged to prevent its fall. In a sense of desperation 1945, the ruler even contemplated buying Goa from the Portuguese and wanted Muslim population of Hyderabad to shift to Goa. If this would have happened the act of Muhammad bin Tuglak may have been repeated.
However, the Muslims of Hyderabad whom the BJP leader has calls as razakars refused to entertain any such idea and wanted to live and die in Hyderabad. A similar comment about Indian Muslims is made by Narendra Modi, the current ruler of the country.
A caveat to this development was the incident of 1932, when Muslim league leader Mohmmad Ali Jinnah came to meet him in Hyderabad. The ruler shouted at the top of his voice and asked ‘Qaid’ to leave at once and not to show his face. Obviously he did not like to entertain any separatist ideas.
It is another story the same ruler in 1947, transferred 10,07,940 pounds sterling and nine shillings in the name of then Pakistan high commissioner in London H.I. Rahimtoola in the National Westminster Bank, which is now called Royal Bank of Scotland.India raised an objection to the transfer, saying the Nizam was not an independent ruler and prevailed upon the bank to freeze the account. Since then the matter is hanging fire. The money is now estimated to have multiplied to 30 million pounds (Rs.3 billion).
There are many tales to tell about the princely rule of Hyderabad but to wrap this discussion, in the interest of the society, sometimes it’s better to forget past history and build a future where each one can live in perfect harmony with their religion, caste and creed intact.
--
Syed Ali Mujtaba is a journalist based in Chennai. He can be contacted at syedalimujtaba@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment