The term ‘Razakars’ has become a focal point in the escalating political battle between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Indian National Congress (INC). The controversy erupted after Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath accused Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge of conveniently forgetting the history of the Razakars, a paramilitary force that operated in the erstwhile princely state of Hyderabad, during a recent election rally. Adityanath alleged that the Razakars, who were said to be associated with the Nizam of Hyderabad, attacked Kharge’s family, causing the death of his mother and sister.
Kharge’s son, Priyank, confirmed the tragic incident in an interview with CNN-News18, stating that their family was targeted during riots in Bidar. His grandfather, alerted by a neighbor about the Razakars setting their house on fire, rushed back from the fields but could only save his son, Kharge. His grandmother and aunt, trapped in the burning house, perished in the tragic event.
The Razakars, whose name translates to ‘volunteers’ or ‘helpers’ in Persian and Urdu, were a paramilitary force that served as the armed wing of the Majlis-e-Itthadul Muslimeen. Their primary objective was to preserve the rule of the Muslim Nizams of Hyderabad and prevent the state’s accession to India. They were accused of perpetrating widespread atrocities against the people of Hyderabad, including looting, torture, and the destruction of families. This dark chapter in Hyderabad’s history, often suppressed due to its sensitive nature, has resurfaced in the context of the current political discourse.
Following India’s independence, the Nizam of Hyderabad refused to accede to the newly formed nation. The Razakars continued their reign of terror, exacerbating the situation. In response, India launched ‘Operation Polo’ in 1948, leading to the integration of Hyderabad into India within a few days. This operation brought an end to the Nizam’s rule and the Razakars’ reign of terror.
The recent use of the Razakars’ history in the political arena has sparked intense debate. While the BJP uses it to attack the Congress and its leadership, the Congress has condemned the allegations, claiming that the BJP is attempting to exploit a sensitive historical event for political gain. The controversy highlights the lingering wounds of the past and the need for a nuanced and objective understanding of historical events. It also underscores the complexities of Indian politics, where history often serves as a potent tool for political maneuvering.
