On December 21, 2025, K. Chandrashekar Rao resurfaced at Telangana Bhavan after months of silence, launching a familiar barrage against Andhra Pradesh and its Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu. Calling the 1956 state formation a “major curse” and accusing Andhra leaders of historic water theft, KCR painted Telangana as perpetual victim. Yet, why does every KCR comeback coincide with moments when his own record faces scrutiny—be it stalled irrigation projects or BRS’s electoral decline?
KCR singled out Naidu for allegedly pressuring the Centre to block the Palamuru-Rangareddy Lift Irrigation Scheme, claiming Naidu’s NDA entry halted progress on a project 88-90% complete under BRS. But why fixate on Naidu when Telangana’s Congress government has held power for over a year? Is blaming an Andhra rival easier than explaining why BRS spent Rs 27,000 crore yet left PRLIS entangled in approvals? KCR’s timing—emerging just as public frustration mounts over current delays—suggests deflection more than defense.
The 1956 merger grievances are real, but why revive them selectively now, when Telangana enjoys statehood and constitutional protections? KCR mocks Naidu’s “fake MoUs” while glossing over BRS’s own unfulfilled promises—Kaleshwaram’s cost overruns and Mission Kakatiya’s incomplete reach. Why does KCR never acknowledge his decade in power, when water disputes persisted despite his control? His narrative of “triple betrayal” by Congress, BJP, and Naidu conveniently omits BRS’s role in the very injustices he decries.
KCR’s rhetoric—terming Andhra leaders “ghuspathiyas” in past speeches—fuels regional acrimony, yet why does he never propose joint mechanisms for Krishna and Godavari sharing? Naidu’s government has sought dialogue on Polavaram backwaters; KCR’s response is rallies, not resolutions. Is perpetual grievance a strategy to rally BRS’s base, or does it mask the absence of fresh ideas after electoral setbacks?
Telangana deserves leadership that builds, not one trapped in yesterday’s battles. KCR’s selective memory—highlighting Andhra’s past while ignoring his own tenure’s lapses.
