NAIKI DEVI DEFEATED MUHAMMAD GHORI

She was the Regent when Ghori invaded

In Greek mythology, the Amazons were a race of warlike women noted for their riding skills, courage, and pride, who lived at the outer limits of the known world, sometimes specifically mentioned as the city of Themiskyra on the Black Sea. From the legendary Amazons of Greek mythology to Queen Boadicea of Roman Britain, warrior women have fascinated the world for millennia. India too has its own share of indomitable women who proved themselves to be fierce fighters and skilled leaders.

It is critical that we understand and appreciate the contributions of women to our country and society. Be it Queen Velu Nachiyar, Queen Abbakka Chowta, Rani Chennamma of Kitturu or the queen of Jhansi, who fought against the British, we know much about them but there are many who still don’t find their place in history books.

There was a queen who not only displayed otherworldly bravery in forcing Islamic invader Mohammad Ghori to flee but also exhibited remarkable benevolence in sparing his life. Naiki Devi, a queen from Gujarat, not only oversaw the affairs of the empire but also ended up fighting against external invaders.

Rani Naiki Devi was the daughter of Mahamandaleshwar Paramadin, the king of Kadamba (Goa). According to one theory, this Paramardin was the Goa Kadamba king Shivachitta Paramadideva (1148–1179 CE). Another theory identifies him with the Chandela king Paramardi. The second theory is based on the identification of "Kakaḍādaha" with similar-sounding "Gāḍāraghaṭṭa". The Chandela-era Garra inscription mentions that a Chandela warrior named Rauta Pape lost his life in a battle at Kakaḍādaha. According to the 14th-century chronicler Merutunga, Naikidevi fought the Muslims at Gāḍāraghaṭṭa. This appears to be the same as Kasahrada, where a Chaulukya army defeated the Ghurids in 1178 CE.

Naiki Devi possessed a wide range of abilities, including horse riding, archery, combat skills, and weapon-wielding. Raja Ajaypal, the Solanki ruler of Gujarat (also known as the Chalukyas), married her. Raja Ajay Pal’s reign was short-lived since he died only four years after ascending to the throne. Mulraj II, the son of Naiki Devi and King Ajay Pal, was installed on the throne, but Rani Naiki Devi remained to govern the empire as Raj Mata or Regent. Established by Vanraj of the Chapotkata dynasty in the 8th century, Anhilwara Patan was the capital of the Chalukya (also known as the Solankis) who supplanted the Chapotkatas. According to American historian Tertius Chandler, the ancient citadel was the tenth-largest city in the world in the year 1000, with a population of approximately 100,000.

Muhammad Ghori invaded India between 1175 CE and 1206 CE, capturing Multan (1175), Punjab (1179), Peshawar (1180), Sialkot (1185), and finally Delhi (1192). After capturing Multan in 1175, Muhammad Ghori planned to strike India in search of wealth. Soon after, he led a major army march to Uch in Pakistan’s Punjab province’s southernmost district. From there, he was able to traverse the desert and begin his journey towards Anhilwara (capital of Chalukyan Kingdom). At the time, Gujarat and Rajasthan were part of the Chalukyan kingdom.

Ghori was obviously confident that the Chalukyas were susceptible to invasion since they lacked a monarch. Because he had a significantly greater army at his disposal, he considered the Hindu queen as weak and could be easily conquered.

When Rani Naiki Devi learned that Ghori planned to invade her by crossing the desert and landing in her capital city of Anhilwara, she appealed to nearly all neighbouring Kingdoms for help in preventing the invasion and safeguarding the kingdom. She did get help from Chalukyan nobles including the leaders of the Naddula Chahamana, Jalor Chahamana, and Arbuda Paramara clans.

The battle of Kasahrada (1178)

Naiki Devi realized that her preparations were insufficient to defeat Mohammad Ghori. So, she devised a battle strategy that would benefit her soldiers. She picked Gadarghatta, a rugged region on the slopes of present-day Mount Abu, as the battlefield. This was in the vicinity of Kasahrada (Kayadara) village. This location is Kyara in the Sirohi district of modern-day Rajasthan.

She picked the terrains because she knew Ghori’s army was full of experienced warriors, including steppe nomads who were outstanding archers and superior armoured cavalry. Ghori and his warriors, in addition to having a technological edge, were motivated by a religious frenzy and were passionate about eliminating non-Muslims and transforming the entire territory into an Islamic land.

The Chalukya forces included the armies of their feudatories such as the Naddula Chahamana ruler Kelhanadeva, the Jalor Chahamana ruler Kirtipala, and the Arbuda Paramara ruler Dharavarsha.

Ghori’s army was unfamiliar with the narrow hill passes of Gadaraghatta, giving Naiki Devi and her allies a significant advantage and balancing the odds in a superb manoeuvre. As a result, when Ghori and his army came, she rode into combat with her son on her lap, leading her troops.

The rest is history. The small Chalukyan army and its troop of war elephants routed the invading force, which had previously defeated Multan’s formidable sultans. The Rajput war elephants were armoured and lined up. They crushed the morale of Ghori’s seasoned armoured cavalry.

Ghori in the battle was a colossal failure. He fled the battlefield with a few of his men to save his life.

His pride had been crushed, and he never attempted to conquer Gujarat again. Instead, he turned his attention to the more susceptible Punjab, intending to penetrate north India through the Khyber Pass next year.

Interestingly, this was the same route taken by Alexander the Great and Mahmud of Ghazni. Later on, Timur (Tamerlane) would also take the same route during his conquest of northwest India in 1383, and so would his descendant Babur, on his way to founding the Mughal empire in India in 1526.

Native accounts

The later Chaulukya inscriptions, as well as the chroniclers of Gujarat, greatly praise Mularaja for this victory:

The poet Someshvara writes that Mularaja defeated the lord of Turushkas (Turkic people), and crushed the mlechchha (foreign) army.

Balachandra mentions that Mularaja defeated the mlechchha king despite being an infant.

Udayaprabha Suri, in his Sukrita-Kirti-Kallolini, states that Naikidevi gave Mularaja an army to play with. With this army, Mularaja defeated the Hammira (Sanskrit form of Emir) and his mlechchha army, whose soldiers were covered from head to toe in order to protect themselves.

Arisimha also mentions that Mularaja defeated the Muslims.

An inscription of Bhima II states that even a woman could defeat Hammira during the reign of Mularaja.

The 14th-century chronicler Merutunga credits the victory to Mularaja's mother Naikidevi, introducing supernatural elements in his account of the battle. According to Merutunga, Naikidevi fought with the mlechchhas at Gāḍāraghaṭṭa and conquered their king. Massive unseasonal rain clouds came to support her, attracted by her virtuous character.

The Sundha Hill inscription of the Jalor Chahamanas boasts that Kirtipala routed the Turushka army at Kasahrada. It also states that his brother Kelhanadeva erected a golden gateway (Torana) at the shrine of the deity Somesha after destroying the Turushkas. Kelhanadeva was the ruler of Naddula; according to the legendary chronicle Prithviraja Vijaya, Muhammad of Ghor had captured Naddula during his invasion of India. Kelhanadeva managed to regain control of Naddula after the victory at Kasahrada.

Muslim accounts

According to the 13th-century Persian chronicler Minhaj-i-Siraj, Muhammad of Ghor marched towards Nahrwala (the Chaulukya capital Anahilavada) via Uchchha and Multan. The "Rae of Nahrwala" (the Chaulukya king) was young but commanded a huge army of elephants. In the ensuing battle, "the army of Islam was defeated and put to rout", and the invading ruler had to return without any accomplishment.

Nizam-ud-din gives a similar account and states that Muhammad of Ghor marched to Gujarat via the desert. The 16th-century writer Badauni also mentions the invader's defeat and states that he retreated to Ghazni with great difficulty. Firishta also states that the ruler of Gujarat defeated the Muslim army "with great slaughter", and the remnant of the defeated army faced many hardships during its return journey to Ghazni.

Alternate theories

None of the Chaulukya inscriptions and chroniclers mentions the invading king's name, simply describing him as a mlechchha, Turushka or Hammira. However, modern historians identify him with Muhammad of Ghor.

According to an alternate theory, the Battle of Kasahrada took place during the reign of Mularaja's successor Bhima II. This theory is based on some Muslim chronicles, which state that "Bhim Dev" was the one who defeated Muhammad of Ghor. Moreover, an 1178 Kiradu inscription, issued during Bhima's reign, records repairs to a temple damaged by the Turushkas. The proponents of this theory argue that Mularaja's forces defeated another king, or that Muhammad of Ghor invaded the Chaulukya territory twice around 1178 CE. For example, H. C. Ray suggests the following alternative identifications of the invaders during Mularaja's reign.

Mularaja has been described as the conqueror of "Garjanaka" in some records. The term "Garjanaka" refers to the Ghaznavids in some other Sanskrit records, and therefore, the invaders during Mularaja's reign may have been the Ghaznavids. However, Ray himself points out that the Ghaznavid ruler Khusrau Malik was not strong enough to launch an expedition against the Chalukyas in the mid-1170s. Therefore, this identification is unlikely to be accurate.

The Sumras ruled the neighbouring region of Sindh during this time. However, this identification is also doubtful. A. K. Majumdar points out that the Soomras, though Muslim, were not called "Turushkas". Moreover, they were petty chiefs at this time, and their own kingdom was threatened by the rising Ghurid power.

According to this theory, Muhammad of Ghor sent a reconnaissance mission to the Chaulukya territory, sometime between 1176-1178 CE, in preparation for his later invasion in 1178 CE during Bhima's reign. The reconnaissance army was defeated during Mularaja's reign, while the main Ghurid army was defeated at Kasahrada during Bhima's reign. This theory is also unlikely to be accurate. None of the Muslim chronicles mentions an earlier Ghurid expedition to the Chaulukya territory. Most notably, none of the Chaulukya (or other Indian) accounts mentions that Bhima achieved a victory against the Ghurids. Such a significant victory would not have been overlooked by the native chroniclers. It is more likely that Mularaja died shortly after the battle, and the Muslim chroniclers wrongly mentioned his successor Bhima as the king who was reigning at the time of the battle.

And it is evident that Naiki Devi was in command since her son was only a child.

________________

This article of mine has been entirely plagiarised by a law student, Chandan Krishna, in Ktreately: https://kreately.in/the-battle-of-kasahrada-1178-story-of-a-queen/?unapproved=1236&moderation-hash=0486cdf52c5a65385ab789b5c85f4607#comment-1236

© Ramachandran

A DICKENS CODE IS FINALLY SOLVED

It was a letter to the Editor of the Times

Despite the intricate plots, Charles Dickens was a messy writer. His manuscripts are full of inky splodges, with barely legible alterations crammed in between scrawled, sloping lines. Worse still was his love of a type of shorthand dating from the 1700s. To this, he added his chaotic modifications to create what he called “the devil’s handwriting”.

The great Victorian writer used these time-saving hieroglyphics to make notes and copies of his letters and documents, reams of which he burned. Academics are still toiling to decipher 10 shorthand manuscripts that survived. And for a long time, this Dickens Code had seemed uncrackable.

Last year, the experts behind what is known as the Dickens Code project put out a call for amateur sleuths to enter a competition, the task being to transcribe one of these baffling documents: a mystery letter that has been kept for more than a century in a New York library. It is scrawled in blue ink on paper bearing the letterhead of Tavistock House, the London home where Dickens wrote Bleak House.

When the competition opened last October with a £300 prize, the note was downloaded 1,000 times in three days. Participants were invited to use guides to brachygraphy, the now obsolete shorthand system that Dickens had adapted. In the semi-autobiographical David Copperfield, brachygraphy is described as a “savage stenographic mystery”.

Competitors also had access to a notebook in which Dickens explained, with characteristic ambiguity, some of his symbols. He used “@” for “about” and an angular kind of “t” to mean “extraordinary”. In the end, only 16 people, from all over the world, were able to submit solutions. None managed the entire thing.

So what does the Tavistock letter say? Sadly, what it does reveal is a suitably convoluted tale of a canny businessman who has reached a fraught juncture in his love life and literary career, and is now leaning on his connections and the courts for help.

“The decoders have helped to cast light on this troubled period in Dickens’s life,” says Dr Claire Wood, lecturer in Victorian literature at the University of Leicester. Wood leads the decoding project with Hugo Bowles, professor of English at the University of Foggia in Italy. After a lengthy process of piecing the entries together and cross-checking with other sources, the pair have a transcript that is 70% complete.

“I feel obliged,” the letter begins, “though very reluctantly, to appeal to you in person.” Three newly translated phrases were vital in understanding what comes next. One sleuth deduced that “HW” referred to Household Words, a periodical Dickens edited and co-owned with the publisher Bradbury and Evans. Another linked the symbol for “round” to All the Year Round, a new journal Dickens founded in 1859 and owned himself after falling out with Bradbury and Evans.

In another breakthrough, one solver translated two scribbles as “Ascension Day”, a Christian feast that falls 40 days after Easter. This fascinated Wood and Bowles because Ascension Day in 1859 coincided with a period in which we know Dickens was attempting to incorporate Household Words into All the Year Round. 

These clues shed light on another letter, written in longhand, fortunately, that is kept at the same New York library. It’s an apology to Dickens from the manager of the Times about a row that had erupted when Dickens asked the newspaper to print an advert alerting his readers to All the Year Round. It mentions another letter, one Dickens had written to John Thadeus Delane, editor of the Times. Until now, this letter was assumed lost.

1859 was a tricky year for Dickens, then 47.  Despite the fame, he had earned with Bleak House and David Copperfield. A year earlier, his marriage had fallen apart amid rumours of an affair with an actress. Dickens published a furious statement in Household Words, describing the rumours as “most grossly false, most monstrous, and most cruel-involving”. When he asked Bradbury and Evans to print the statement in Punch, which is also published, the company refused. Their relationship fell apart and the publisher declined an offer from Dickens to buy its share of Household Words.

He had a divorce, a rumoured mistress, and 10 children to look after. Household Words, which Dickens launched in 1850, was a vital source of income. It had taken off in 1854 with the serialisation of his novel Hard Times.

Bradbury and Evans wanted to keep Household Words alive without him – and sued to prevent him from giving the impression the magazine was closing. However, a judge ruled in Dickens’s favour. yes, he could announce the switch, as long as he said Household Words was being “discontinued by him” and not the publisher. A triumphant Dickens used this phrase in the advert intended for the Times, but a clerk rejected it. The Tavistock letter is, we now know, the writer’s desperate bid to rescue the situation by appealing to the editor, an acquaintance. The Times apologised and reinstated the advert.

All the Year Round, which he launched with the first instalment of A Tale of Two Cities, was a sensation. A year later, it serialised Great Expectations. 

The £300 prize was won by Shane Baggs, a Californian IT worker and code enthusiast, who solved the most symbols.

THE LONE INDIAN WARRIOR IN BEIJING

India has only one man in Winter Olympics

December to February is the best time to visit India's Kashmir in winter. While the maximum temperature occasionally touches 10 degrees Celsius, the minimum temperature comes down to -8 degrees. The weather in Kashmir during winters is pleasant, the surroundings become duskier and the bone-chilling cold can make you numb.

Hence, if India is to send someone to compete in the Winter Olympics in Beijing, he has to be from Kashmir. Yes, an alpine skier from Kashmir, Mohammad Arif Khan is the lone Indian participant at the Beijing event.

Though China faced some opposition to the event from the West, India didn't boycott it. While the US and its European allies raised the Tibetan and Uyghur issues, India made it clear that it will not join calls from the West, although there is tension along the Line of Control.

Arif khan will compete in the Slalom event- alpine skiing. For Beijing 2022, Khan has already won quotas in both men’s slalom and giant slalom – making him the first Indian to qualify for two separate events directly. Khan is a national and South Asian slalom champion in alpine skiing.

Arif Khan

In November 2021, Khan became the first athlete from the country to earn a quota place for the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics in the slalom event in alpine skiing. It fulfilled a lifelong dream for the skier. A month later, Khan pushed the envelope even further, winning a quota place in giant slalom at a meet in Montenegro. The feat earned the skier a unique distinction of becoming the first Indian to win direct quota spots in two different Winter Olympics events.

“As children, we used to play football and cricket, but there was no playground around us,” Khan said, “Skiing was the only convenient sport for us.”

Khan’s father Yasin Khan owns a ski equipment shop in Gulmarg and so, he was always close to the sport. He first took it up at the age of four. “It was in 1994,” Khan remembered, “We had to walk about 500 metres to the ski shop. And there was thick snow. My father had groomed a small ski slope just outside the shop. We started (skiing) at around 9.30 AM and went on for hours.”

Khan turned to competitive skiing when he was ten years old and steadily rose up the ladder. At the age of twelve, Khan won a gold medal in the slalom in his first appearance at the national championship. He made his international debut for India when he was 16 at a junior international ski federation (FIS) event in Yomase, Japan. He finished 23rd in the giant slalom. In 2011, Khan won two gold medals - in the slalom and giant slalom - at the South Asian Winter Games, the only edition held thus far.

Khan’s first taste of the FIS World Ski Championships came in 2013. He finished 59th in the slalom and 91st in the giant slalom and was unable to move past the qualification stage. Since then, Khan has taken part in three more world championships, with his best result being 45th in the giant slalom at the 2021 edition in Italy. It was the first time he qualified for the final in any world championship event.

Skiing being an expensive sport, most of Khan's funding comes from his father, who poured his income from the ski equipment shop into his son’s career. Khan also doubles up as a skiing instructor or a coach occasionally to make up for the shortfall. Ahead of the Pyeongchang 2018 Winter Olympics, Khan had to turn to crowdfund to train and cover other expenses in the lead up to the Games. However, he fell short by a small margin and his dream was left unrealized.

In 2021, he had planned to get married in September but decided instead to put all his energies into qualifying for the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics.

“I want to put my country on the skiing map,” Khan Said. “If I can achieve something, the global skiing community will take note of where I am from. It might make them see India as a potential top skiing destination.”

India in Winter Olympics

Alpine skiing has been a key part of India’s presence at the Winter Olympics over the years. Alpine skiers represented India at 1964, 1968, 1988, 1992, 2006, 2010 and 2014 Winter Olympics.

Alpine skiing is one of the Winter Olympics’ signature competitions. Often referred to as downhill skiing, it involves competitors skiing down a snow-covered mountain slope as quickly as possible. It’s held in a time trial format, as opposed to skiers racing each other. Overall, alpine skiing has five events - downhill, slalom, giant slalom, super-G and combined. Medals are on offer for both men and women at each event. A mixed team event - a parallel slalom competition - was added for the 2018 Winter Olympics and is a part of the 2022 Winter Olympics as well.

Slalom is considered the fastest event among alpine skiing. Competitors ski down a slope that has a vertical descent of 180m to 220m for men or 140m to 180m for women. Skiers pass through ‘gates’ or two plastic poles. Each gate has a minimum width of 4m and a maximum of 6m. Skiers often knock over the poles to find the fastest route. Slalom skiers have to pass through two courses. Eliminations take place after the first course based on timings. The competitor with the lowest combined time across the two courses is declared the winner. Switzerland’s Edy Reinalter and American Gretchen Fraser were the first gold medal winners in the men’s and women’s slalom events, respectively, at the 1948 Winter Olympics.

Similar to the slalom, giant slalom also involves skiing down a slope and passing through gates with turns. However, in giant slalom, the vertical descent for skiers is between 250-450m for men and 250-400m for women. Each gate has a minimum width of 4m and a maximum of 8m. Skiers get two runs down the slope and the winner is determined by the fastest cumulative time.

The giant slalom was introduced to the Winter Olympics in 1952 in Oslo, Norway. Norwegian Stein Eriksen was crowned the first men’s giant slalom Winter Olympic champion and the USA’s Andrea Lawrence won the women’s giant slalom gold at the 1952 Winter Olympics.

Compared to the Summer Games, where India has featured in 25 editions, the country's tryst with the Winter Olympics has been relatively few and far between. Considering India is a sub-tropical country, the affinity for winter sports is less and therefore, infrastructure is not as developed as those needed for sports in the Summer Games.

Though the Winter Games began way back in 1924, it took India 40 years to put up its first athlete in the quadrennial showpiece. At the 1964 Games in Austria, Jeremy Bujakowski became the first Indian to compete at the Winter Olympics. He was the only Indian at that edition and competed in the men's downhill alpine skiing event. Born in Lithuania to Polish parents before moving to India, and having spent time in the USA for his studies, Jeremy Bujakowski had a lot more exposure to winter sports than an average Indian at the time. Bujakowski couldn’t complete his race at the 1964 Games but went back to compete in three events - men’s downhill, slalom and giant slalom – at the 1968 edition. This time, he finished the downhill and giant slalom events, ranking 53rd and 65th, respectively.

Post the Bujakowski era, India skipped the Winter Olympics for 20 years. India returned to the Winter Olympics at the Calgary 1988 Games in Canada. Barring the 1992 Games, Indians have taken part in all Winter Games since then.

India sent a contingent of three to Calgary in 1988. Gul Dev and Kishor Rahtna Rai competed in the men’s slalom event while Shailaja Kumar became the first Indian woman to compete at the Winter Olympics. Kumar finished 28th in women’s slalom – the best result by any Indian Winter Olympian at the time. The next time India had a woman competing at the Winter Games was 18 years later with Neha Ahuja featured in women’s slalom and giant slalom at the 2006 Winter Olympics in Italy. Ahuja is the first Indian woman to qualify for the Winter Olympics by meeting minimum qualifying standards. Kumar’s slot was an invitational one. To date, Kumar and Ahuja are the only two women Winter Olympians from India.

India's history at the Winter Olympics is incomplete without the mention of six-time Winter Olympian Shiva Keshavan.

Arif Khan

While almost all other Indian Winter Olympians have competed in ski-based sports, Shiva Keshavan introduced luge – a completely different sport – to the country’s winter sports fans. Luge has been part of the Winter Olympics programme since 1964. In simple terms, luge is a timing-based race in which an athlete lies down face up on a sledge and slides at incredible speeds through a predefined course. The luger with the fastest cumulative time is deemed the winner. Luge has four categories - men’s singles, women’s singles, doubles and team relay. There is no specific rule stating that athletes of the same gender must compete in the doubles.

Luge is often considered the fastest sport at the Winter Olympics, with lugers hitting top speeds of more than 130km/h. Athletes are required to lay in the supine position - face up and feet first - on a sledge and have to slide down a course, which has small turns, as fast as possible. Flat on their backs, lugers steer the sledge and change direction by shifting weight with the help of their calf muscles and using their shoulders to slide around.

Shiva Keshavan qualified for his first Winter Games in 1998 at Nagano, Japan. Aged just 16 back then, Keshavan also became the youngest luger to qualify for the Winter Olympics at the time. Keshavan has gone on to compete in five more Winter Olympics since then, making him the most-decorated Winter Olympian in Indian history.

Interestingly, at Sochi 2014, Keshavan competed under the (International Olympic Committee) IOC flag rather than the Indian tricolour. Heading into the Sochi Games, the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) was serving a ban and the three Indian athletes, including Keshavan, started the Games as Independent Olympic Participants (IOP). However, the IOA was reinstated midway through the Sochi Games, which allowed the Indian athletes to finish the edition officially representing the Indian flag. But Shiva Keshavan had already finished his event before the ban was lifted and his results were recorded under IOP. Shiva Keshavan retired after the 2018 Winter Games.

India is yet to win a medal at the Winter Olympics.

China's Winter Plans

But, China is using the Games to promote winter sports, many of which are new to most Chinese, for fitness and business opportunities. Many in Beijing have long enjoyed winter ice skating on canals and lakes. But now, young Chinese are expanding their aspirations from basketball, football and gymnastics to sports such as hockey and skiing.

The 2022 Winter Olympics will be the first Winter Olympics in China, and the last of three consecutive Olympics in East Asia (after the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang, South Korea, and the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo, Japan). As its second Olympic Games, Beijing will be the first city to have ever hosted both the Summer and Winter Olympics. The Winter Games will take place without foreign tourists or ordinary spectators under China's "zero tolerance" strategy that aims to keep the virus out of the country.

The government and private companies have built ice rinks and ski runs. Public schools are adding skating and other winter sports. Parents are opening their wallets to pay for hockey teams and skating lessons. Villages near ski slopes are building inns to serve well-heeled tourists.

At the Vanke Shijinglong Ski Resort, visitor numbers have risen by 15% to 20% a year since Beijing and neighbouring Zhangjiakou were awarded the Winter Games in 2015. At least 8,000 people in Beijing are on hockey teams, People's Daily quoted Xing He, the deputy secretary-general of the Beijing Ice Hockey Association. Nationwide, more than 450 ice rinks and 300 snow resorts have been built since 2015, though some have closed at times during the pandemic, said Li Sen, director of the Beijing Olympic organizing committee's General Planning Department.

Post- COVID, foreign sports brands see growth opportunities in China. Winter brings happiness and prosperity. Hence, the English poet William Blake said: "In seed time, learn, in harvest teach, in winter enjoy."

© Ramachandran 

പണിക്കർക്ക് സോമനാഥ ക്ഷേത്രം വേണ്ട

സർദാർ പണിക്കരുടെ കപട മതേതരത്വം 

സർദാർ കെ എം പണിക്കർ, ഗുജറാത്തിലെ സോമനാഥ് ക്ഷേത്ര പുനർ നിർമ്മാണത്തെ എതിർത്തിരുന്നു എന്ന് തെളിയിക്കുന്ന ഒരു കത്ത് ഈയിടെ പുറത്തു വന്നു. ഇതേ അഭിപ്രായമുണ്ടായിരുന്ന പ്രധാനമന്ത്രി ജവഹർലാൽ നെഹ്‌റുവിന്, പണിക്കർ 1951 മാർച്ച് 21 ന് എഴുതിയതാണ്, കത്ത്. ഇതിൽ, ക്ഷേത്ര പുനർ നിർമാണ ട്രസ്റ്റിൽ നിന്ന് തനിക്ക് കിട്ടിയ 'അമ്പരപ്പിക്കുന്ന' ഒരു കത്തിനെപ്പറ്റി പറയുന്നു.

അന്ന് ചൈനയിൽ ഇന്ത്യൻ സ്ഥാനപതി ആയിരുന്ന പണിക്കരോട്, ചൈനയിലെ ചില പുഴകളിൽ നിന്നുള്ള വെള്ളവും ടിബറ്റിലെ ഷാൻ മലയിൽ നിന്നുള്ള മരച്ചില്ലകളും ക്ഷേത്ര അഭിഷേകത്തിന് അയച്ചു കൊടുക്കാൻ ട്രസ്റ്റികൾ ആവശ്യപ്പെട്ടെന്ന് പണിക്കർ പറയുന്നു. രാഷ്‌ട്രപതി ഡോ എസ് രാജേന്ദ്ര പ്രസാദാണ് ചടങ്ങിൽ മുഖ്യാതിഥി. ഇസ്ലാം അധിനിവേശക്കാർ നശിപ്പിച്ച ക്ഷേത്രങ്ങൾ പുനർനിർമ്മിക്കുക എന്ന ആശയത്തോട് താൻ എന്നും എതിരായിരുന്നു എന്ന് വ്യക്തമാക്കിയ ശേഷം പണിക്കർ എഴുതുന്നു:

"If an unofficial Hindu organisation wanted to restore that temple, no one could have any objection. Even then, where is one to stop? Kutub Minar to be pulled down and the stones which came from temples used for restoring the shrines? Is Aurangzeb’s tomb in Banares to be pulled down and Kashi Viswanath restored to original glory? If we start on this Path, where are we to stop? This is the state of mind that leads straight to RSS and the desire to revive Hindupada padishahi in India. I was rather surprised to see that some members of the Government were associat­ed with it and the suggestion that the President of India should be the chief yajaman of this obscurantist reviva­lslism, I confess, was a little frightening”. (1)

(ഒരു അനൗദ്യോഗിക ഹിന്ദു സംഘടന ആ ക്ഷേത്രം പുതുക്കിപ്പണിയാൻ മുതിർന്നെങ്കിൽ, ആർക്കും എതിർപ്പുണ്ടാവില്ല. അങ്ങനെ വന്നാലും, ഇതിന് ഒരു അവസാനം വേണ്ടേ? കുത്തബ് മിനാർ തകർത്ത് ക്ഷേത്രങ്ങൾ പൊളിച്ചു കൊണ്ട് വന്ന അതിൻറെ കല്ലുകൾ കൊണ്ട് ക്ഷേത്ര പുനർ നിർമ്മാണത്തിന് ഉപയോഗിക്കാൻ കഴിയുമോ? ബനാറസിലെ ഔറംഗസേബിൻറെ കല്ലറ പൊളിച്ച് കാശി വിശ്വനാഥ ക്ഷേത്രത്തിൻറെ മഹിമ പുനഃസ്ഥാപിക്കാൻ കഴിയുമോ? ഈ വഴിക്ക് നീങ്ങിയാൽ, നാം എവിടെ വരെ ചെല്ലും? ഈ മാനസികാവസ്ഥയാണ്, ആർ എസ് എസിലേക്കും ഹിന്ദു പഥ പാഠങ്ങളുടെ പുനരാവിഷ്കാര അഭിലാഷങ്ങളിലേക്കും നയിക്കുന്നത്. ചില മന്ത്രിമാർ ഇതുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെടുന്നതും ഈ പിന്തിരിപ്പൻ പുനർനിർമ്മിതിയുടെ യജമാനനായി രാഷ്‌ട്രപതി വരുന്നതും എന്നെ ഭയപ്പെടുത്തുന്നു.")

ചില മന്ത്രിമാർ എന്ന പ്രയോഗം ആഭ്യന്തര മന്ത്രി സർദാർ പട്ടേൽ, ഭക്ഷ്യ , കൃഷി മന്ത്രി കെ എം മുൻഷി എന്നിവരെ ഉന്നം വച്ചായിരുന്നു.

മാവോയും പണിക്കരും 

മുസ്ലിം അധിനിവേശത്തിന് ശേഷമുള്ള ഇന്ത്യയുടെ ചരിത്രം 'സോമനാഥിസ്റ്റുകൾ' മറക്കുന്നതായി പണിക്കർ കുറ്റപ്പെടുത്തി. കത്ത് ഇങ്ങനെ തുടർന്നു:

“These are the real founders of India of today and our “Somnathists” unfortunately desire to forget them. I am sorry to inflict this on you, but I think you should know how strongly some of us feel at all this dangerous “revivalism” which seems to have affected even those closely associated with Governments in the Provinces and even at the Centre”.

(അവരാണ് ഇന്നത്തെ ഇന്ത്യയുടെ സ്രഷ്ടാക്കൾ. അവരെ 'സോമനാഥിസ്റ്റുകൾ' നിർഭാഗ്യവശാൽ വിസ്മരിക്കുന്നു. അങ്ങയോട് ഇത് പറയാൻ ദുഖമുണ്ട്. എന്നാൽ, ഈ അപകടകരമായ "പുതുക്കൽ വാദം", സംസ്ഥാനങ്ങളിലും കേന്ദ്രത്തിലുമുള്ള സർക്കാരുകളുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെട്ടവരെപ്പോലും ബാധിച്ചതിൽ എന്നെപ്പോലുള്ളവരുടെ രോഷം അങ്ങ് അറിയേണ്ടതാണ്.")

1948 ൽ ചൈനയിലെ ആദ്യ ഇന്ത്യൻ സ്ഥാനപതിയായ പണിക്കർ അവിടത്തെ കമ്മ്യൂണിസ്റ്റ് പാർട്ടിയുടെ പിണിയാളായി മാറിയത് സർദാർ പട്ടേലിന് സഹിച്ചിരുന്നില്ല. അതിലുള്ള രോഷം കൂടി പണിക്കരുടെ വാക്കുകളിൽ വായിക്കാം.

സോമനാഥ ക്ഷേത്ര പരിഷ്കരണം ഹിന്ദു പുതുക്കൽ വാദമാണെന്ന് പണിക്കർ പറയുന്നത് വിചിത്രമാണ്; ഇതു തന്നെയാണ്, നെഹ്‌റു, ക്ഷേത്രം പുതുക്കാൻ ഇറങ്ങിയ മന്ത്രി കെ എം മുൻഷിയോടും പറഞ്ഞത്.

കത്തിൽ സോമനാഥ ക്ഷേത്രത്തിലേക്ക് കടക്കും മുൻപ്, പണിക്കർ. മകൾ ദേവകി കമ്മ്യൂണിസ്റ്റ് ആകുമോ എന്ന ശങ്ക പങ്കിടുന്നു. ഓക്സ്ഫഡിൽ പഠിച്ചിട്ടും തൊഴിൽ കിട്ടാത്ത ദേവകിയെ 'നാഷനൽ ഹെറാൾഡ്' പത്രത്തിൽ എടുത്താൽ കൊള്ളാമെന്ന ശുപാർശയമുണ്ട്. ചൈന കണ്ട് ആകൃഷ്ടയായി കമ്മ്യൂണിസ്റ്റ് ആകാൻ ആഗ്രഹിച്ച ദേവകിയെ പണിക്കർ ഡൽഹിയിൽ എ കെ ഗോപാലനെ ഏൽപിച്ചു. എ കെ ജി ക്കൊപ്പം കേരളത്തിൽ എത്തിയ ദേവകി, പാർട്ടി സെക്രട്ടറി എം എൻ ഗോവിന്ദൻ നായരെ 1952 ൽ വിവാഹം ചെയ്തു. കമ്മ്യൂണിസ്റ്റ് പാർട്ടിക്ക് അധികാരം കിട്ടും വിധമാണ്, സംസ്ഥാന പുനഃസംഘടനാ കമ്മിഷൻ അംഗമായിരുന്ന പണിക്കർ കേരളത്തിൻറെ അതിരുകൾ നിശ്ചയിച്ചതെന്ന് എം കെ കെ നായർ ആത്മകഥയിൽ എഴുതിയിട്ടുണ്ട്.

ചൈന ടിബറ്റിൽ അധിനിവേശം നടത്തിയതിനെ പണിക്കർ അനുകൂലിച്ചു. ടിബറ്റിനെ ചൈന ബലമായി വിമോചിപ്പിച്ചാൽ, ഇന്ത്യ ഇടപെടില്ലെന്ന് വിദേശമന്ത്രി ഷു എൻ ലായിക്ക് പണിക്കർ ഏകപക്ഷീയമായി ഉറപ്പ് നൽകി. ബ്രിട്ടീഷ് ഭരണ കാലത്ത്, ചൈനയ്ക്ക് ടിബറ്റിന് മേൽ മേൽക്കോയ്മ ഉണ്ടെന്ന് മാത്രമായിരുന്നു, ഇന്ത്യൻ നയം. ടിബറ്റ് സ്വതന്ത്ര സംസ്ഥാനം എന്നർത്ഥം. ഇന്ത്യ സ്വതന്ത്രമായ ശേഷവും ഇതായിരുന്നു, നയം. എന്നാൽ, പണിക്കർ സ്വയം ഈ നയം അട്ടിമറിച്ചു. ചൈനയുടെ പരമാധികാരത്തിനു കീഴിലെ സ്വയംഭരണമാണ് ടിബറ്റിൽ എന്നാണ് 1950 ഓഗസ്റ്റിൽ പണിക്കർ ഒരു ലേഖനത്തിൽ വിശദീകരിച്ചത്. മേൽക്കോയ്മ (suzerainty) എന്നതിന് പകരം, പരമാധികാരം (sovereignty) എന്ന് പണിക്കർ പ്രയോഗിച്ചു. പട്ടേലിൻറെ എതിർപ്പിൽ പിടിച്ചു നിൽക്കാനാകാതെ നെഹ്‌റു പണിക്കരെ 1952 ൽ ഈജിപ്തിലേക്ക് മാറ്റി.

മുഹമ്മദ് ഗസ്നി, അലാവുദീൻ ഖൽജി, ഔറംഗസേബ് തുടങ്ങിയ മുസ്ലിം അധിനിവേശക്കാർ സോമനാഥ ക്ഷേത്രത്തെ ആക്രമിച്ചിരുന്നു. ക്ഷേത്രം പുതുക്കി പണിതത് ഇന്ത്യയുടെ ആദ്യ ആഭ്യന്തര മന്ത്രി സർദാർ പട്ടേലിൻറെ ശ്രമഫലത്താലാണ്. ക്ഷേത്ര ഉദ്‌ഘാടനത്തിന് രാഷ്‌ട്രപതി രാജേന്ദ്ര പ്രസാദിനെ ട്രസ്റ്റ് ക്ഷണിച്ചപ്പോൾ അദ്ദേഹത്തെ നെഹ്‌റു വിലക്കി. നെഹ്‌റു അദ്ദേഹത്തിന് എഴുതി:

“I confess that I do not like the idea of your associating yourself with a spectacular opening of the Somnath Temple. This is not merely visiting a temple, which can certainly be done by you or anyone else but rather participating in a significant function which unfortunately has a number of implications”. (2)

("അങ്ങ് സോമനാഥ ക്ഷേത്ര ഉദ്‌ഘാടനത്തിൻറെ ആഡംബരപൂർണമായ ചടങ്ങിൽ പങ്കെടുക്കുന്നതിനോട് ഞാൻ യോജിക്കുന്നില്ല. ആർക്കും ഒരു ക്ഷേത്രത്തിൽ ആരാധനയ്ക്ക് പോകാം. ഇത് അങ്ങനെയല്ല. നിരവധി പ്രത്യാഘാതങ്ങളുള്ള ഒരു ചടങ്ങിൽ പങ്കെടുക്കലാണ്.")

രാജേന്ദ്ര പ്രസാദ് ചടങ്ങിൽ പങ്കെടുത്തു. അദ്ദേഹത്തിൻറെ പ്രസംഗത്തിന്റെ പ്രക്ഷേപണം നെഹ്‌റു വിലക്കി.

ഗുജറാത്തിലെ ഗിർ സോമനാഥ് ജില്ലയിലെ ഈ ശിവ ക്ഷേത്രം 1026 ൽ തകർത്ത മുഹമ്മദ് ഗസ്നി വിഗ്രഹം തകർത്തിരുന്നു. 1842 ൽ ഗവർണർ ജനറൽ എല്ലൻബറോ അഫ്‌ഗാനിസ്ഥാനിലെ ബ്രിട്ടീഷ് പട്ടാളത്തോട്, സോമനാഥിലെ ചന്ദന വാതിലുകൾ എടുത്ത് ഗസ്നി വഴി വരാൻ ഉത്തരവിട്ടു. എന്നാൽ, പട്ടാളം കൊണ്ട് വന്ന വാതിലുകൾക്ക് സോമനാഥുമായി ഒരു ബന്ധവും ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നില്ല. (3) ഈ വാതിലുകൾ ആഗ്ര കോട്ടയിലെ ഖാസ് മഹലിൽ കണ്ടത് ഓർക്കുന്നു. ഹിന്ദുക്കളെ പ്രീണിപ്പിക്കാൻ എല്ലൻബറോ കാട്ടിയ വങ്കത്തമായിരുന്നു, ഇത്. ഈ വാതിലുകൾ മുഹമ്മദ് ഗസ്നിയുടെ കല്ലറയുടേത് ആയിരുന്നു!

നാഗർകോട്ട്, താനേസർ, മഥുര, കനൗജ്, കളിഞ്ചർ ക്ഷേത്രങ്ങളും മുഹമ്മദ് ഗസ്നി കൊള്ളയടിച്ചു.

രാജേന്ദ്ര പ്രസാദ് സോമനാഥിൽ 

സോമനാഥ് ക്ഷേത്ര പുനർ നിർമ്മാണം ആദ്യം ഉന്നയിച്ചത്, 1947 നവംബർ 12 ന് ജുനഗഡിലെ പൊതുയോഗത്തിൽ, സർദാർ പട്ടേൽ ആയിരുന്നു. ജുനഗഡ് നവാബ് പാക്കിസ്ഥാനിലേക്ക് പലായനം ചെയ്ത ശേഷം ഇന്ത്യൻ പട്ടാളം അദ്ദേഹത്തിൻറെ കൊട്ടാരം പിടിച്ച അവസരമായിരുന്നു, അത്. ഡൽഹിയിൽ മടങ്ങി എത്തിയ പട്ടേൽ ക്ഷേത്ര പുനർ നിർമ്മാണത്തിന് ഗാന്ധിയുടെ അനുഗ്രഹം വാങ്ങി. ഇത് കേന്ദ്ര മന്ത്രിസഭയെ കൊണ്ട് പട്ടേലും കൂട്ടരും അംഗീകരിപ്പിച്ചു. കേന്ദ്രം തന്നെ പണം മുടക്കാൻ വേണ്ടി ആയിരുന്നു ഇത്. എന്നാൽ, പട്ടേൽ, കെ എം മുൻഷി, എൻ വി ഗാഡ്‌ഗിൽ എന്നിവർ അന്ന് വൈകിട്ട് ഗാന്ധിയെ കണ്ടപ്പോൾ പണം സർക്കാർ മുടക്കാതെ ഒരു ട്രസ്റ്റ് ഉണ്ടാക്കാൻ ഗാന്ധി നിർദേശിച്ചു. മുൻഷി ചെയർമാൻ ആയി ട്രസ്റ്റ് ഉണ്ടായി.

ഗാന്ധി വധത്തിന് ശേഷം, മത വൈരം നിറഞ്ഞ അന്തരീക്ഷത്തിൽ, നെഹ്‌റു കപട മതേതരത്വം കൈക്കൊണ്ടു. രാഷ്ട്രപതിയായി സി രാജഗോപാലാചാരിയെ നെഹ്‌റു ആഗ്രഹിച്ചെങ്കിലും, പട്ടേലിൻറെ നോമിനി രാജേന്ദ്ര പ്രസാദ് ആ സ്ഥാനത്തു വന്നു. 1950 ഡിസംബറിൽ പട്ടേൽ മരിച്ചതോടെ, നെഹ്‌റുവിന് തടസ്സങ്ങൾ നീങ്ങി. 1951 ൽ പുതുക്കിപ്പണിത ക്ഷേത്രത്തിൻറെ ഉദ്‌ഘാടന നേരത്ത്, രാഷ്ട്രപതിയോട് നെഹ്‌റു ഇടഞ്ഞത്, ഈ പശ്ചാത്തലത്തിലാണ്. 1951 ൽ ഒരു മന്ത്രി സഭാ യോഗത്തിന് ശേഷം തന്നെ രഹസ്യമായി വിളിച്ച്, ക്ഷേത്ര നിർമ്മാണം, 'ഹിന്ദു പുതുവാദം' (revivalism) ആണെന്ന് നെഹ്‌റു പരാതിപ്പെട്ടതായി, മുൻഷി ആത്മകഥയിൽ (Pilgrimage to Freedom) എഴുതുന്നു. അന്ന് വൈകിട്ട് മുൻഷി, നെഹ്‌റുവിന് എഴുതി:

“Yesterday you referred to Hindu revivalism. You pointedly referred to me in the Cabinet as connected with Somnath. I am glad you did so; for I do not want to keep back any part of my views or activities… I can assure you that the ‘Collective Subconscious’ of India today is happier with the scheme of reconstruction of Somnath… than with many other things that we have done and are doing.”

(ഇന്നലെ വൈകിട്ട് അങ്ങ് ഹിന്ദു പുതുവാദം പരാമർശിച്ചു. മന്ത്രി സഭായോഗത്തിൽ സോമനാഥുമായി ബന്ധപ്പെട്ടയാൾ എന്ന് എന്നെ പേരെടുത്ത് പരാമർശിച്ചു. അതിൽ ഞാൻ സന്തോഷിക്കുന്നു. എൻറെ അഭിപ്രായങ്ങളോ കർമ്മങ്ങളോ ഞാൻ നിർത്താൻ ഉദ്ദേശിക്കുന്നില്ല. .... നാം ചെയ്തതും ചെയ്യുന്നതുമായ പലതിനെക്കാളും, സോമനാഥ് പുതുക്കിപ്പണിയുന്നതിൽ ഇന്ത്യയുടെ സമൂഹ ആത്മ ബോധം ഇന്ന് സന്തുഷ്ടമാണ്.)

രാജേന്ദ്ര പ്രസാദ് 1951 മെയ് 11 ന് പുതുക്കിയ സോമനാഥ ക്ഷേത്രം തുറന്നു. അദ്ദേഹം നെഹ്‌റുവിന് എഴുതി:

"I believe in my religion and cannot cut myself away from it.” (4)

(ഞാൻ എൻറെ മതത്തിൽ വിശ്വസിക്കുന്നു; എനിക്ക് അതിൽ നിന്ന് എന്നെ മുറിച്ചു മാറ്റുക സാധ്യമല്ല).

കാശി വിശ്വനാഥ ക്ഷേത്രത്തെ പഴയ മഹിമയിൽ മോദി എത്തിച്ചതോടെ, പണിക്കരുടെ കപട മതേതരത്വവും കാലഹരണപ്പെട്ടു. നെഹ്‌റുവിന് ഇന്ത്യയുടെ സ്വാതന്ത്ര്യം പ്രഖ്യാപിക്കാൻ ജ്യോത്സ്യനെ കൊണ്ട് ഗ്രഹനില കുറിച്ചു കൊടുത്തത് താനാണെന്ന് ആത്മകഥയിൽ വീമ്പു പറഞ്ഞ വിദ്വാൻ കൂടിയാണ് പണിക്കർ.

----------------------------

1. Op India, July 30, 2020

2. Sarvepalli Gopal, Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru

3  Somnatha: The Many Voices of A History, 2004

4. Durga Das, India: From Curzon To Nehru And After, 2004

 © Ramachandran 

THE FUTURE OF CHINESE INVESTMENT IN INDIA

 The Fall of Chinese Investments in Indian Startups

Li Jian, a power broker in the Indo-Chinese tech relationship, moved to India in 2007, after graduating from Peking University, majoring in Indian Languages and Culture. He spent five years as head of public affairs at Huawei in Delhi and then founded an investment consulting service called Draphant. He became a major investor in Entrackr, an Indian media startup, in 2017.

 Following Chinese giant Alibaba's investments in Indian startups, Entrackr began organizing “guided knowledge exchange” tours to China. Between 2017 and 2019, it took over 200 people from India to China. Li adopted an Indian name Amit, after the Bollywood superstar Amitabh Bachchan, and acted as liaison partner for Chinese delegations visiting India. Gurugram, where Li's company is based, began developing a Chinese startup subculture.

 When Li returned in January 2020 to celebrate Chinese New Year with his family in Guli, China, he was sure that his startup Draphant was poised to capitalize on Chinese investments in India. What happened next came as a shock. In January, the COVID hit India, and in June, a border clash worsened the bilateral relationship between China and India. The Indian government declared that all Chinese investments in Indian companies would have to be reviewed by the state before they could proceed. It was followed by a three-phase ban of over 250 Chinese-owned apps, wiping out most of the Chinese internet market that had blossomed. Entrackr was compelled to turn to external funding sources, including Paytm, raising USD 500,000 in February 2021, to keep it afloat.

In January 2020, Indian food-delivery startup Zomato had raised USD 150 million from Alibaba's fintech arm, Ant Financial, but was unable to access USD 100 million of the funds. Koo, the nationalistic alternative to Twitter, divested the 9% stake that Chinese Shunwei Capital held in the firm. More than USD 2 billion worth of investment proposals from China is currently held up in India’s slow approval process.

Some circumvented the FDI restrictions using debt instruments. Tencent invested USD 40 million in music streaming platform Gaana and another USD 224 million in ShareChat. The Gaana investment came via Tencent’s European entity, using convertible debentures. Li Jian helped companies find financial instruments, like external commercial borrowings that let Chinese investors move money into China. But, the void in the capital in Indian startups has now been filled by U.S. firms like Tiger Global, which has invested USD 1.74 billion, in 15 deals in the first half of 2021.  

Chinese dawn in Indian startups

Till the beginning of 2020, Chinese money was flooding into India’s startup ecosystem. In 2018, Chinese VCs invested USD 5.9 billion into India. E-commerce giant Alibaba was an early investor in Paytm, Zomato, Bigbasket, and Snapdeal, while its rival, Tencent, backed Flipkart, Byju’s, Ola, and Swiggy.

But the sudden turn in 2020 meant that the Chinese players who participated in the creation of India’s unicorns cannot participate in a new funding boom — USD 7.2 billion was raised in the quarter ended June 2021 alone. 

In the early 2000s, Chinese companies like Alibaba, Tencent, Baidu, and Xiaomi had focused on their USD 1.3 billion-strong domestic market. In 2014, when Alibaba was listed in the U.S., its USD 231 billion valuation, made it the largest IPO in history.

Flush with funds, for these Chinese giants, India’s growing startup ecosystem seemed fit for strategic investment. In 2015, Alibaba paid USD 680 million for a 40% stake in Paytm. Later that year, they were part of a USD 500 million investment in Snapdeal. The Alibaba group has been investing in the supermarket chain, Bigbasket from 2017 onwards. While the investment in 2017 remains undisclosed, in 2018 it was USD 146 million, in 2019 and 2020, USD 50 million each.

 Tencent joined in 2016, leading a USD 175 million round in Hike Messenger, India's answer to Whatsapp. Hike gave up on messaging in January 2021. In 2019, Tencent invested USD 100 million in India’s first gaming app to enter the unicorn club, Dream11.

 Xiaomi made its first investment in an Indian company by pouring USD 25-million in Hungama Digital Media Entertainment. It also invested in Marsplay, Oye Rickshaw and ZestMoney.

Paytm’s valuation almost tripled to USD 8.3 billion in two years and its success attracted smaller players and venture capitalists, like Morningside and Shunwei Capital, a sister concern of Xiaomi. In 2017, Shunwei Capital invested in ShareChat and the next year, it led to a USD 50 million investment in Meesho. It has since invested over USD 100 million in Indian startups, including in podcasting company KuKu FM and Indian alternative to Whatsapp, Koo.

Shunwei was joined in the Indian market by CDH Investments, Qiming Ventures, Orchid Asia Group, Legend Capital, Steadview Capital, and China insurer Ping An's fund, which were mostly looking to back proven business models. One such target was Cashify, which resembled AiHuiShou, a Chinese platform on which users bid for second-hand electronics. Three Chinese funds — CDH Investments, Morningside, and Shunwei Capital — were invested in Cashify in 2018.

The last Chinese investment in an Indian startup was in April 2020, by Legend Capital in the interactive online tutoring unicorn Vedantu, with a contribution of USD 10 million.

There has been a 12x growth of Chinese investments in Indian startups from 2016 to 2019. A report titled “Chinese Investments in India” by Gateway House estimates that the total value of Chinese investments in Indian startups during 2015 - 2020 is approximately USD 4 billion. 18 Indian unicorns including Flipkart, Dream11, Delhivery and Rivigo are backed by Chinese investments.

The economic rationale behind these investments is many. First, with the saturation in the Chinese domestic market, India is viewed as one of the last emerging markets with untapped potential. Moreover, Indian markets suffer from a lack of capital due to which investments are welcome in the system. Third, there is immense creativity and ideas that are offered by the Indian engineering institutes and the skills of young techies. And finally, these investments in India give China a competitive edge against the U.S.

China takes a back seat

 Over the last two decades, India has received a cumulative USD 456.91 billion in FDI, with over 72% of it coming from five countries: the US, Singapore, Japan, Netherlands and Mauritius— China is not one. 

The proportion of China’s FDI in India during the same period constituted a mere USD 2.34 billion or 0.51% of the total inflows. However, post-2014, Chinese investments shot up considerably across startups. But the preference for Chinese investors has gone down significantly from 29% in 2020 to 3% in 2021. The change in FDI regulations since 2020, resulted in funding from Chinese investors in India falling from USD 3.5 billion in 2019 to USD 1.05 billion in 2020.

 

After almost a nine-month freeze, the Indian government started clearing the Chinese FDI proposals in early 2021, for the ‘smaller cases’, while the larger proposals are to be dealt with later after a careful analysis. The Chinese gap may be filled by investments from other markets such as the US, UK, and Japan.

Thus, India startup funds topped China in July 2021, the first time since 2013, after China stepped up a regulatory clampdown on its tech companies. Indian startups raised nearly USD 8 billion in July, while funding to Chinese firms dropped to about USD 5 billion, according to a Bloomberg report. Indian startups have raised a record USD 17 billion during January-June 2021, a surge from about USD 12 billion raised in full-year 2020 and USD 14 billion in 2013.

 Though Chinese startups raised about USD 49 billion in the first six months of 2021, funding has slowed since the December quarter of 2020. From a peak of USD 27.7 billion raised in Q4 2020, Chinese startup funding dropped by 18% t0 USD 22.8 billion in Q2 of 2021, while India funding rose by 62% t0 USD 6.3 billion from USD 3.9 billion in the same period. India has seen 36 new unicorns in 2021, while China has added about 15. India raised nearly USD 20.76 billion across 583 deals as of August 20.

 And it is too early to paint a negative picture vis-à-vis China. India and China seem set to hit a record-high trade of USD 100 billion, having already touched USD 90.37 billion in the first nine months of 2021 — a 49.3% year-on-year rise, according to the latest data from China’s General Administration of Customs (GACC). China was India’s top trading partner in the April-July period, followed by the US, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Singapore. Exports and imports between India and China grew at over 65% in the January-June period this year. The push by the Modi government for self-reliance couldn’t put a pin in the ballooning trade.

 

 © Ramachandran 

CHINA AND A LESSON FROM GANDHI

A Lesson From the Trusteeship Theory

In his paper, Harijan, Gandhi enumerated his Doctrine of Trusteeship on February 23, 1947, when Mao fought for his people in neighbouring China. 

 

Gandhi was an economist of the masses. The fluid international conditions fraught with ideological tensions in the economic domain demanded a fresh approach to economic philosophy. The core of Gandhian economic thought is the protection of the dignity of the human person and not mere material prosperity. He aimed to develop, uplift, and enrich human life rather than a higher standard of living with scant respect for human and social values. Gandhi's idea of trusteeship arose from his faith in the law of non-possession. The world's bounties are for the whole, not for any individual. When an individual has more than his respective portion, he becomes a trustee for the people.

 The trusteeship formula of Gandhi reads as follows: 

 

1. Trusteeship provides a means of transforming the present capitalist order of society into an egalitarian one. It gives no quarter to capitalism but gives the current owning class a chance to reform itself. He felt that human nature is never beyond redemption.

 

2. It does not recognize any right of private ownership of property except that society may permit it for its welfare.

 

3. It does not exclude legislation of the ownership and use of wealth.

 

4. Thus, under state-regulated trusteeship, an individual will not be free to hold or use his wealth for selfish satisfaction in disregard to the interests of society.

 

5. It proposed a decent minimum living wage and a limit on the maximum income allowed to any person in society. The difference between such minimum and top incomes should be reasonable and equitable and variable from time to time, so much so that the tenancy would be towards obliterating the difference.

 

6. Social necessity determines the character of production and not by personal greed.

 

Gandhi wanted Zamindars/ Kulaks/ landlords to act as trustees of their lands and use them by tenants. This idea was based mainly on India being an agricultural country where more than 80 per cent of the population lives in villages. 

 

Gandhi's doctrine of trusteeship is a social and economic philosophy aiming to bring justice to society. It provides a means by which the wealthy people would be the trustees of the trust that looked after the welfare of the people in general. Gandhi believed that the rich people could be persuaded to part with their wealth to help the poor, and he held that labour is superior to capital.

 

He formulated the trusteeship theory after the Ahmedabad textile mill workers dilemma. He became more aware of the prevailing gap of interest between the owners and workers of the industries. Gandhi introduced the concept of trusteeship based on class cooperation in society. He believed that even the rich people are, after all, human beings, and as such, they also have an element of essential goodness that everyman necessarily possesses. The capitalist should be aroused by that element and won over by love. And persuade them to believe that they should utilize the wealth in their possession \for the good of the poor. The rich should realize that the capital in their hands is the fruit of the labour of poor men. This realization would make them perceive that the welfare of society lies in using money and resources for the good of others and not for one's comforts. It is a doctrine of moral responsibility and a practice of Non- possession.

 

Italian philosopher Thomas Aquinas said that bringing justice is the responsibility of the state and individuals by being empathetic, compassionate, and selfless. Gandhi's doctrine is akin to this idea. It is the responsibility of rich people to uphold the philosophy of trusteeship by being charitable. Trusteeship assumes great relevance nationally and globally, keeping in mind the growing inequality and poverty. 

 

Half of the world owned by 62

 

An Oxfam report reveals that one per cent of people in the world possess 50 per cent of the world's total wealth, and just 62 people own the same as half of the world. The wealth of the poorest half has fallen by a trillion dollars since 2010, a drop of 38 per cent. Despite the global population increasing by around 400 million people during that period, it has occurred. Meanwhile, the richest 62 has increased by more than half a trillion dollars to $1.76 trillion. The report also shows how inequality disproportionately affects women – of the current '62' richest, 53 are men, and just nine are women. 

 

A total of $7.6 trillion of individual wealth sits offshore. If the rich paid tax on this income, an extra $190 billion would be available to governments every year. As much as 30 per cent of all African financial wealth is estimated to be offshore, costing an estimated $14 billion in lost tax revenues every year. It is enough money to pay for healthcare for mothers and children in Africa to save 4 million children's lives a year and employ enough teachers to get every African child into school. The number of people living in extreme poverty halved between 1990 and 2010. The annual income of the poorest rose only less than $3 in the past quarter of a century. Had inequality within countries not grown between 1990 and 2010, an extra 200 million people would have escaped poverty.

 

In India, one per cent of people own 58 per cent of total wealth. 

 

The Gandhian principle of trusteeship is closely related to the social responsibility of business. According to Gandhi, all business firms must work as a trust. Business people should change their attitude. They have no moral right to accumulate unlimited wealth while most fellow citizens live in poverty and misery. 

 

Few richest men in the world, like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and Jeff Bezos, have rarely shown the principle of trusteeship. Even during COVID, the corporates were trying to make money by developing vaccines and reducing overheads by implementing the system of working from home. 

 

The crackdown in China

 

Several leading Chinese internet companies, including Tencent, Alibaba, Didi Chuxing, and eSuning, were fined 500,000 yuan ($77,345) for breaching the anti-monopoly laws in July 2021, as China stepped up its crackdown campaign against monopolistic behaviours that threaten to stifle market vitality. Alibaba paid a record $2.8 billion fine in April. Market regulators determined these companies to have breached the "concentrations of undertakings" provision under the anti-monopoly law in a total of 22 equity investment and joint venture deals, the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) had said in a statement. 

 

Multiple subsidiaries of Didi - Xiaoju Kuaizhi Inc - were among the penalized parties, days after Didi was removed from Chinese app stores by order of China's cyberspace regulator over cybersecurity issues. The probes of the 22 cases, which involved fields such as new retail, e-commerce, logistics, fintech, ride-hailing, and charging piles in the new-energy vehicle industry, started in March and April 2021. Xiaoju Kuaizhi Inc and BAIC Mobility Co, a subsidiary of Beijing Automotive Industry Holding Co (BAIC Group), failed to report to the SAMR about their joint venture before obtaining a business license. It violated Article 21 of the Anti-Monopoly Law and constituted an illegal concentration of business operators. E-commerce company Suning and a subsidiary controlled by China's largest online food delivery platform Meituan were also on the receiving end of fines. Many of the fined companies are there on overseas stock markets.

 

China has been ramping up crackdowns on its digital platform companies, as the digital economy accounts for a growing percentage of the world's second-largest economy and poses some serious risks. The government is seeking to regulate the market, curb the disorderly expansion of capital and inject vitality into the vital sector, which already accounted for 36.2 per cent of the nation's GDP as of 2019. The closure of 109 monopoly cases by SAMR marked the country's antitrust push was marked by 2020, with penalties totalling 450 million yuan and intensified anti-monopoly crackdowns on internet platform companies. Last year, the SAMR told 34 platforms - including Tencent, Alibaba, Baidu, and Meituan - to thoroughly rectify their monopolistic behaviour, and tax-related irregularities or violations, within one month.

 

The crackdown was waiting to happen because the corporates were pretending to be bigger than the state and the people, shirking off their social responsibility. They could have taken a leaf out of Gandhi or Marx.

© Ramachandran