Misrepresentations and distortions about Telangana Armed Struggle : Suravaram Sudhakar Reddy

April 26, 2023 Andhra Jyothi daily newspaper titled “Communism separate communist parties separate” written by senior journalist Danny is full of untruths and baseless allegations. The title itself is meaningless. One of his baseless allegations is that communists are against muslims and leaders of the Communist Party of India do not like any existential groups, shows clearly that how he is erroneously misconceived. Also, "When British India had about 560 princely states, the question that anyone should ask is why the communists started an armed struggle only in the Nizam's state. It may be a logical argument that the Nizam's administration was crueller than those Princely states but that was not the case. The Nizam was ahead of the rest of the Princely states in the fields of education, medicine, health, irrigation, railways, electricity etc. There must be some other reason,” Danny wrote.

Another reason Danny finds is religious influence. Devulapalli Venkateswara Rao's book was referred to it. This is a pure false accusation. He argued that the Hindu landlords were naturally against the Nizam. Danny reference to Devulapalli having said that the Communist Party leaders argued that Hindu landlords lands should not be distributed to the poor because they will be anti - Nizam’s. This is totally a false allegation. Devulapalli Venkateswara Rao was one of the top leaders of the Telangana Communist Party and armed struggle. His book is like a "self critique" of armed conflict.

Telangana is a large part of the vast Hyderabad state. Initially, Communist Party leaders fought for fundamental rights through the 'Andhra Mahasabha' against the Nizam State, the largest feudal state in the country. It is known that after that it turned into an armed struggle.

Armed struggle will advance where conditions are ripe. Ponnapra - Violar armed struggle was waged by the Communists in the Travancore-Cochin state ruled by a Hindu king. An armed struggle was waged against the monarchy in Manipur. They may be small compared to Telangana, where a few hundred people were martyred as well.

Danny's depiction of the armed struggle as a struggle in only two districts of Nalgonda and Warangal is outrageous. It had also extended to Karimnagar, Adilabad, Mahbubnagar and Medak districts. The struggle was more extensive in Nalgonda - Khammam - Warangal - Karimnagar districts

It is a pure lie that Hyderabad was better than other provinces in education, medicine, health, irrigation, railways, electricity and all other sectors. If some facilities are provided in Hyderabad, is it enough as nothing was done across the state? Telugu, Marathi and Kannada languages are not allowed in the state. There are no schools except in Warangal and Hyderabad. There is no electricity in the districts. The state of Hyderabad was a hostage of other languages. Only Urdu language was allowed.

After the fall of the Turkish Empire, Osman Ali Khan tried to make himself appear to be modern by setting up a university, Osmania General Hospital, railway’s in Hyderabad and some industries in Warangal, with the desire to become the head of the Muslim world, according to a book written by one of his close friends. But in the rural areas people were crushed under the rule of tyrannical landlords and Deshmukhs. Telangana had the most atrocious 'Vetti' (bonded labour) which is not found in any other state.

The statement that "Hindu landlords opposed the Nizam" is a pure lie. Some conscious people opposed the Nizam but ninety percent of the landlords were with the Nizam. With the support of the Nizam, they brutally exploited the peasants, poor people and raped the women. The muslim farmer Bandagi was killed by the Hindu landlord Visunuri Ramachandra Reddy, the landlord was not punished. Deputy Chief Minister Pingali Venkata Rama Reddy was in the Nizam's cabinet till the police action. It was he who told the then Prime Minister not to surrender and that he would lay down his life for the Nizam.

From the beginning Danny seems to have written from Religions perspective. He writes that the Muslim youth in Tashkent formed Indian Communist Party rejected the "Indian Communist Party" and formed the CPI in Kanpur in 1925. It did not form a party after the Tashkent meeting. Not all regions were present. Only That statement was there. The party had no program and no leadership till then, so on December 26, 1925, leftist groups from different parts of the country came together to form the CPI. What is Danny's problem with the fact that the party emerged in the country instead of on a foreign soil? There are many Muslim leaders in the Communist Party of India. Starting from Muzaffar Ahmad, Z.A. Ahmad, Mukhamuddin Farooqui, Sajjad Zaheer, Shamim Faizi, Makdhoom Mohiuddin and hundreds of leaders and thousands of party members.

If the Nizam's administration in Telangana was so good as he said, how did the armed struggle get support so quickly in vast areas. If the communist leaders were anti-Muslim, how could 99 percent of the ten lakh acres distributed during the days of the armed struggle was from Hindu landlords. Isn't it true that along with Ravi Narayana Reddy, Baddam yella Reddy and Makhdoom Mohiuddin who called for armed struggle? Shoaibullah Khan, the editor of Amroz Urdu magazine, who was killed by Razakars, was not a Muslim? The communist leaders Sarva Deva Bhatla Ramanadham garu distributed 1800 acres, Ravi Narayana Reddy garu distributed 600 acres and many more leaders owning lands distributed to the poor. Then, how can the communists say that the farms of the Hindu landlords should not be distributed. This is sheer subjectivism. This understanding is not correct.

If the Razakars committed brutal rapes in the villages, they were killed by the communists and the people. There are no allegations that even a single Muslim was killed in the armed conflict. Pandit Sunder Lal wrote in the report after an inquiry into the matter that there had been a massacre of Muslims in Marathwada. There is no mention of Telangana. Last year, MIM leader Asaduddin Owasi declared that the Telangana armed struggle was an anti-feudal struggle.

Telangana armed struggle became heroic & historical. Ravi Narayana Reddy did not make any announcement calling off the armed struggle. The Central and State Committees took the decision and made the announcement. With the police action, the middle class people, farmers, businessmen and others felt that their support for the armed struggle was not necessary after the merger with the Indian Union. That is why 3,500 communists died in the second phase. In the first stage, about thousand people died. After the accession of Hyderabad to the Union of India, a discussion began among the common people about the armed struggle. There was confusion among the poor people. Nizam's army had old weapons. The Indian army had advanced weapons; The communists did not have the modern weapons to face them. The revolutionary struggles are carried out by the people and the Communist Party leads. Is it heroic to fight and die to the last communist as the "democratic state" has not yet arrived when popular support is weak? That is why the withdrawal took place and the communist party of that day had to take such decision.

Whether Danny agrees or not, the police action is due to the armed struggle. The agenda of land reforms has come before the country. In the 1952 general election, the people judged the actions of the communists as correct. Danny is also unable to digest that Ravi Narayana Reddy got more votes than Jawaharlal Nehru. He describes it as the gift of the landlords! Many landlords fled away during the armed conflict. The big fort like bungalows called 'Gadis' were broken and some were killed. Will they support Ravi Narayan Reddy to win? Is there anything more absurd than this?

There is a serious contradiction in his article. Starting with why the armed struggle against the Nizam was started and finally what was achieved by the withdrawal of armed struggle.

The Communist Party may have made some mistakes. We have done self-criticism. We will do more if necessary. Is Russia the way? Is China the way? There may have been some discussions. Don't copy the Russian Revolution as Lenin taught. He said that the communist parties of the respective countries should decide how to apply Marxism based on the historical conditions of the respective countries.

Communists in India are fighting their own way for revolution. Manifestos of the Communist parties like CPI, CPI (M) can be read to understand their programs. There are many communist parties and revolutionary groups in India. Differences of opinion can be discussed. It is not easy. But only through the reunification of the communist movement in India the revolutionary struggles can more effectively move forward.

It is not right for anyone to throw any vile mud on the communists while claiming to be a Marxists.