Hyderabad: The publication on Thursday by The Hans India of WikiLeaks’ coverage of the conversation of the then Deputy Speaker, Mr Nadendla Manohar, on the Telangana issue with Mr Cornelis Keur, the US Consulate-General in Hyderabd, has set off a wide condemnation of Mr Manohar’s behavior while in office, with many demanding his resignation from his current position as Speaker of the State Assembly.
It is often said that perfect objectivity is an unrealistic goal; however, fairness is not. Judged even in this refrain, a large section of people felt, Mr Manohar being the Deputy Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly should have kept such views to himself and not dwell on them publicly and, that too, with the representative of a foreign government.
The people whom The Hans India spoke to were aghast at Mr Manohar’s “damning” viewpoints on so sensitive issues as Telangana agitation, caste and Naxalites.
That he had failed to uphold the decency and decorum of the office he held was evident from their caustic reactions. As they criticised the lack of objectivity by the then Deputy Speaker, it came to mind an apt quote by the 26th President of the US, Theodore Roosevelt: “The most practical kind of politics is the politics of decency.”
If the demands are pouring in for the resignation of Mr Manohar, it is because they were angered no end by his personal views. Some people even argued that the views could not be taken as personal and in fact amounted to those of the thinking going on in the government.
The following points may help unmask Mr Manohar and expose the real intentions and objectives dear to his heart.
T agitation will bolster Naxalites
During the conversation, Mr Manohar “brazenly” points out to a foreign government that the Andhra Pradesh police were convinced that the Naxalites would use the ongoing agitation for statehood for recruiting cadres, as had been so in the past.
That he had verified for himself personally or officially it was not known, but Mr Manohar claimed such authenticity as to claim that the 1969 Telangana movement was essentially a Naxalite recruitment movement and that most of the leaders who fought in it went on to become popular leaders of the Naxalite movement. He would have been very young at that explosive movement unfolded during the latter part of the 60’s.
What would his views imply other than driving home that the current ongoing agitation for Telangana also, for which so many youth had laid down or took their lives, would come in handy for the Naxalites for recruitment of cadres. Is it a mere law and order problem, and not one representing ardent wishes of the Telangana people?
This viewpoint has surely rubbed the Dalit community the wrong way, and how.
In a shocking way, Mr Manohar, hailing from a dominant caste – Kamma – derisively points out that the leadership spearheading the students’ movement for a separate state was mainly composed of Madigas. He casually remarks that it is the 30-plus Madigas who are leading the movement and who are neither concerned about their education or careers.
His views are being perceived as anti-Dalit and the demand for his resignation, worse dismissal, would only grow louder by the day. First of all, why should he speak to a foreign government on such subjects? Was he not bound by the oath he had taken? How could he cast aspersions on the students’ participation in the movement? Do his views on the 1969 movement not amount to falsifying the history? Was he just a careless politician who would later on become the Speaker of the Assembly itself?
These are the questions that Mr Manohar and Congress Party which selected him for the high post should answer these pertinent questions.
From: The HANS India