A historical view on Operation Polo

The military action by the Government of India against the Nizam’s State during September 13-17, 1948 was an important historical landmark. It ended the autocratic-feudal regime and integrated the Hyderabad State into the Indian Union. This historical event has been subjected to conflicting interpretations by different scholars with opposite political and ideological leanings. While one set of scholars argue that it was emancipation, others maintain that it was a tragedy and destruction. Recently several civil society forums and political organisations in Telangana have been propagating their ideas to suit their particular ideological/political standpoint.

An examination of the arguments indicates that they were not based on authentic historical sources and recorded evidences. The Hindutva advocates from a religious point of view maintained that September 17, 1948 heralded ‘liberation’ for Hindus from Muslim tyranny, while the proponents of minority communal perspective described it as a ‘tragedy.’ The interpretation offered by the nationalist and leftist groups vacillates between emancipation and integration.

However, the available historical evidence contradicts the communal interpretation offered by a set of scholars and writers. The religious dimension has been added to the event because the ruler happened to be the Muslim and the ruled were Hindus. While it is true that Nizam was a Muslim by faith and religion, the Hyderabad State was not a theocratic state based on Shariat. It was certainly an autocratic regime. Hence, it cannot be understood that the conflict between the rulers and the ruled was based on exclusively religious/communal considerations.

Moreover, during the Nizam’s rule the ‘Hindu’ and non-Muslim landed gentry and nobles played an important role in the administration. The thesis of Hyderabad liberation based on religious considerations is not supported by the historical evidence. Historically speaking, the historic Telangana Peasant Armed Struggle fought by the exploited masses for land, livelihood and emancipation was based on the principles of rationalism and secularism.

The common people of Telangana, in particular the vast majority of dalit bahujans, did not visualise the contradiction between autocracy-feudalism and themselves on religious and communal lines. Similarly, the leftist mobilisation and fight against Razakar atrocities was not based on religious considerations. The fact of the matter was the Razakars meant not only or exclusively Muslims; there were also sections of dalit bahujans. Moreover, the Hindu landlords in Telangana gave shelter in their 'Gadies' and supported the Razakar forces to suppress peasant revolutionaries.

The emancipation concept propounded by the Hindutva ideologues misses out this important dimension and emphasises on the monolithic communities. Moreover, the recently made available secret government reports, papers etc., reveal the fact that the military action against the Hyderabad State was aimed to suppress both the Communist uprising and Razakars; it was mainly targeted against the armed struggle.
According one estimate, the number of Communist revolutionaries who were killed by the Indian military between the years 1948 and 1951 far exceed the number killed by the Nizam’s police, Razakars and military forces between July 1946 and September 1948.

Thus, the military action did not lead to real emancipation of the people of Telangana, as it protected the interests of the landed gentry. The gains of the peasant armed struggle were not allowed to be enjoyed by the landless poor peasants. The brutality and the ruthlessness displayed by the military forces and the Briggs plan of mass encounters led to massacre of thousands of people and resulted in a great human tragedy. Another adverse consequence of the military action was the massacre of thousands of Muslims by Hindu communalists.

According to Pandit Sunderlal Committee report, between 27,000 and 40,000 Muslims were killed by the Hindu fanatic elements, mainly in the Kannada and Marathwada regions of the erstwhile Hyderabad State. In the Telangana region, Nalgonda, Medak, Warangal districts also witnessed communal violence. In a secret report in November 1948 sent to the Government of India, General Chaudhary mentioned, “Immediately after the military occupation started, a large majority of Hindus in all districts of Hyderabad, thought that Hindu Raj had come into being.… As a result of this retaliatory action by Hindus, some Muslims in certain districts suffered.

The districts particularly affected were Bidar, Osmanabad, Gulbarga, Nalgonda & Warangal. Though accurate figures cannot be obtained yet of what the casualties were, it is estimated that about 2,000 Muslims may have been massacred.” A confidential intelligence report of October 1948 noted, “Muslims who did not have much to do with the Razakar organization have also been greatly victimised.… In Secunderabad several Muslim houses and shops were looted both day and night for about ten days from 18-9-48, with Indian troops not effectively intervening to stop the lawlessness.

Both in Hyderabad City and the mofussil it would appear that many sections of the irresponsible Hindu public looted and oppressed Muslims indiscriminately.” Given the multifaceted dimensions of the Police Action against the Nizam’s State, it is reasonable to assume that any interpretation based on narrow and sectarian considerations without proper historical evidence is unwarranted. In the context of the rise of Hindutva ideology, it is particularly necessary to interpret the recent past in an objective and holistic perspective.

An unbiased understanding of the past history and cultural legacy of Telangana is the necessity of the hour. Especially in the light of the flourishing of cosmopolitan and mixed culture in the Telangana region since the times of the Bahamanis, Qutubshais and Asafjahis, it is imperative to maintain communal harmony and religious co-existence. The implications of the event on 17th September 1948 need to be dispassionately discussed and interpreted. Any interpretation based on religious and communal perspective, without authentic evidence poses the danger of polarising the Telangana society and destroying its composite cultural legacy. (Writer is a retired Professor of History, Osmania University)

By Prof Adapa Satyanarayana