GERMAN SPY WHO DIRECTED AN INDIAN MOVIE

He also wielded the camera for a Malayalam movie

Felix J Beyse, a German cinematographer, stumbled into Malayalam cinema and then simply disappeared from the scene after six months. His name is mentioned in the annals of Malayalam cinema as the director and cinematographer of the 1949 film Vellinakshatram. 

He was the technical brain behind Alapuzha-based Udaya Studio, owned later by producer-director Kunchako. People who worked with Beyse in the film and at the studio only knew him as a German cinematographer. Nothing was known about his background, how and why he reached India, and what happened to him, after the movie. Aleppey Vincent, who invited him to direct the movie, believed that Beyse was a German spy, monitoring the Madras port.

Germans in Bollywood

At least half a dozen Germans were behind the foundation of the Bollywood film industry. Dadasaheb Phalke’s Lord Harischandra was India’s first Black and white silent movie shot in 1912; it was in the 1930s that the Indian film Industry actually started opening up and the first truly “Indian” black and white sound movie, Alam Ara was shot in 1931 by Ardeshir Irani.

Felix Beyse

In 1925, an Indian lawyer in London, Himanshu Rai (1892-1940) collaborated with Niranjan Pal, a writer friend of his, to make a movie out of English poet- Edwin Arnold's The Light of Asia, based on the life of Buddha. Born into an aristocratic Bengali family, he spent several years in Santiniketan for his schooling. After obtaining a law degree from Kolkata, he went to London to become a barrister. There, he met the playwright and screenwriter Niranjan Pal. All of the biggest studios in England refused to take up The Light of Asia project stating that the scale was grandiose. This led Rai to Munich in Germany, and to the Emelka film studios. After a little negotiation, it was decided that the studio would help Rai.

Finally, the movie named Prem Sanyas was shot in Jaipur, India in 1925 by a team of four German filmmakers from Emelka Film Studios: Franz Osten directed the movie. Josef Wirsching was the main cameraman along with assistant cameraman Willie Kiermaier. Barthe Schultes was in charge of production. Himanshu Rai was the hero and primary producer.

It was shot at the Jaipur palace with the complete assistance of the Maharaja of Jaipur. This was historically the very first Indo-German Cinematic collaboration.

The movie was screened for the King and Queen of England in 1926 and it received rave reviews from British royalty. While making his third film, Prapancha Pash, he met and fell in love with actress Devika Rani, a great-grandniece of the Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore. Before this film was complete, he married her.

Devika Rani Kissing Himanshu Rai in Karma (1933)

Rai, along with his wife decided to start their film studio in Bombay in 1935 and Bombay Talkies was born at Malad. Emelka studios helped him procure all the equipment and provided him with a team of filmmakers to be the technical backbone of the studio. Apart from Osten and Wirsching, the team consisted of Karl Graf von Spretti for set design and architecture, Willy Zolle as the laboratory-in-charge and a Britisher, Ben Hartley in charge of sound recording.

They joined the ranks of other émigrés seeking refuge from German fascism, in India: writer Willy Haas; Walter Kaufmann, composer of the All India Radio theme; Paul Zils, who helped grow non-fiction film in the country.

Together, this creative Indo-German team produced some of the most iconic musical films of the era, such as Jawani ki Hawa (1935) and Achhut Kanya (1936), which dealt with urgent social reform and nationalist issues of the day.

The Wirschings—Josef and his wife, Charlotte—settled down in Mumbai. Their lives took a difficult turn when World War II broke out. Wirsching was held in internment camps in Ahmednagar, Dehradun and Satara, till 1947. After his home in Munich was destroyed in an air raid in 1944, Wirsching settled down in Mumbai, and started working with outside productions, including Kamal Amrohi’s Mahal (1950) and Dil Apna Aur Preet Parai (1960).

Josef Wirsching

Asok Kumar Ganguly, a simple Bengali boy hired by the studio to be Wirsching’s laboratory assistant, became one of the most distinguished actors in Indian Cinema. Rai had cast Asok Kumar, brother-in-law of Rai's film-maker partner Sashadhar Mukherjee in Jeevan Naiya, replacing its hero, Najmul Hasan. Rai suspected a secret liaison between Devika Rani and Hasan.

Wirsching was a publicity-shy filmmaker who made phenomenal contributions to German and Indian Cinema from 1925 to 1967. His magnum opus was Pakeezah which he worked on from its start in 1959-60 till 1967 when he died. It was finally released in 1972 after numerous cameramen tried to replicate his technical brilliance for a few remaining scenes.

All through this eventful history, Felix Beyse's name never figures anywhere.

Beyse in Madras

There was a German photo studio in Madras which was called Wiele & Klein. The Baedeker, a German travel guidebook with a tradition that goes back to 1828, mentions in its 1914 edition on India that it is the most famous late 19th and early 20th Century photographic Studio in the South of India, and identifies it as a German one.

E.F.H. Wiele has been described by many as British. He might have held a British passport, but certainly was an ethnic German. A well-known architect named Wilhelm Bockmann (1832-1902) reports in his travel book, published in Berlin in 1893, that he had in 1892 attended a Christmas reception by the German Consul in Madras, where he was introduced to several German businessmen who lived in Madras, amongst them a Mr Wiele and a Mr Klein. About Theodor Klein being German there is no dispute. The Wiele & Klein studio goes back to an earlier studio, Calastry Brothers.

In 1908, E.F.H. Wiele established his own studio in Bangalore. In 1908, Klein travelled to London, where he married the much younger Valeska Drinne­berg, sister of Erwin Drinneberg (1890-1964). It is not known what happened to the Kleins after Britain declared war on the German Empire in early August 1914.

Beyse landed in Madras when the Malayalam film industry was taking its baby steps. Movies did not enjoy the moral support of the upper strata of society and the technicians were mostly from the lower middle class. In 1948, the Malayalam movie Nirmala broke the convention by selecting members of the upper class as its main characters. The film produced by artist P J Cherian featured his newly-wed son and daughter-in-law in lead roles. Incidentally, Franz Osten directed an Ashok Kumar movie by the same name in 1938.

It was not a success and was followed by Vellinakshatram, a historic movie in the annals of the Malayalam industry on various counts. Though the film tasted failure at the box office, it is still remembered for the mystery that surrounds its director, Felix Beyse.

A book, Malayala Cinema Charithram, Vichithram by Chelangat Gopalakrishnan, who was associated with Alleppey Vincent, has the most authentic account of Beyse. Vincent, actor of the first Malayalam talkie, Balan, who was involved in the activities of Udaya Studio and also an integral part of Vellinakshatram knew something more about this mysterious German.

One of the shocking revelations Vincent made much after Beyse left was that he was a German spy sent to India by German Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler before the Second World War.

Those were the years when films on nationalism reaped success in India. The film buffs in Kerala began preparations to set up a studio and that marked the beginning of Udaya Studio at Alapuzha. Kunchako, who took over the reins of this fledgling studio later, was not in the picture at the time of its foundation.

Beyse behind the camera at Alapuzha

In an old building in Alapuzha, Vincent, Communist leader T V Thomas and a few others like Anandan Pillai and Raman Pillai gathered to form the studio. The group began working on a film on nationalism and Vincent, who had sufficient knowledge of movies after his stint with Balan in 1938, was sent to Madras to learn more about the technical side of film shooting, setting up a studio etc.

Vincent, who reached Madras to meet people and seek assistance for Udaya’s film, met Beyse at Victoria Hotel in Egmore. Beyse was apparently staying there.

One morning when Vincent was shaking off water from his hands after washing his face, droplets fell on a foreigner who was standing beside him. Vincent apologized and the foreigner returned a courteous gesture.

The two got talking and soon turned friends. Beyse agreed to assist in the production and Vincent was more than delighted because Beyse owned a camera. Vincent offered him Rs 1000 per month during the shooting.

Vincent returned to Alapuzha with Beyse, his wife and two children. They were put up at the tourist bungalow there. Beyse convinced Vincent and others that if there was a camera and a studio floor, the cost of making a film would be half of making it in Madras.

The next mission was to find an ideal location to set up the studio. Their search ended when they found a huge plot of land at Pathirappally, four miles north of Alapuzha town. Sometime in 1947 construction of the studio began in right earnest. Soon, the studio floors and other small buildings came up. All of them were designed by Beyse and he used one of the cottages. Vellinakshatram was shot in this studio.

Though the plans for the next film ensued, the founding partners of Udaya Studio entered into a legal tangle after Kunchako committed a deal to buy the studio. Kunchako gained the rights to the studio, and the dispute seemed to upset Beyse. Following the tussle, the studio was locked down for some time and its future was hanging in balance. Beyse left in a huff.

That Beyse was a Nazi spy was revealed to Chelangat Gopalakrishnan by Vincent when the duo were in Kochi after they set up the Ajanta Studios at Aluva. Vincent cautioned Gopalakrishnan not to reveal the truth until his death.

Aleppey Vincent

Vincent suspected that Beyse was posted in Madras to report on the movement of the British and their activities in and around the city. Beyse was supposed to have been trained in a studio by none other than Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda man.

During this time the Indian National Army (INA) founded by Subhash Chandra Bose had a strong base in Madras. Many INA soldiers and workers chose Madras as a gateway to Malaya, Singapore and Japan, countries that were Germany’s allies during the War. INA was a strong ally of Germany and Bose had met Hitler.

Berlin was a base of Indian revolutionaries like Virendranath Chatopadhyaya (Chatto, 1880-1937), Bhupendranath Dutta (Swami Vivekananda's brother, 1880-1961), Chempaka Raman Pillai (1891-1934) and they were funded by Germany generously. An Indian bureau was set up in Berlin to launch a revolution in India. Other Indians associated with the Berlin Committee were: Abhinash Chandra Bhattacharya (1882-1962), Tarachand Roy (1890-1952), Mansur Ahmed (1898-1979), Maulavi Barakatullah (1854-1927), Taraknath Das (1884-1958), Birendranath Dasgupta and the brothers Abdel Jabbar Kheiri (1880-1958?), Chandrakant Chakravarty, M. Prabhakar, Birendra Sarkar, Heramba Lal Gupta (c.1854- 1950) and Abdel Sattar Kheiri (1885-1953?). M N Roy, Lala Hardayal and Madam Cama were associated with this outfit.

A British Communist spy, Walter Strickland, who posed as a Botanist in Travancore, had recruited Chempaka Raman Pillai. Pillai's life was mired in controversies, including a squabble with Adolf Hitler, and he is credited with coining the salutation and slogan "Jai Hind" in the pre-independence days of India. 

On September 22, 1914, the SMS Emden, a German warship commanded by Captain Karl von Muller entered the waters off the coast of Madras, bombed the facilities near the Madras harbour and slipped back into the ocean. The British were taken aback by this sudden attack. His family stated that Pillai coordinated the German attack with his personal presence in the SMS Emden, though this is not the official view. It is widely believed that Pillai and some Indian revolutionaries had a hand in the SMS Emden bombardment of Madras.

Goebbels had been sending spies around the globe and Madras port was a corridor for the Nazi spies to make their forward journey to East Asian countries, where there was a fierce revolt against the British. Thus it was suspected that Beyse had been sent by Goebbels to shoot in and around the Madras port. Vincent remembered that Beyse seemed restless whenever the news about the Nuremberg trials, held to bring Nazi criminals to justice, appeared in the papers.

In 1940, Rumours about a Mysore-based German businessman, Ernest Neuenhofer, had been swirling about for a while. A suspected Nazi spy, he was being held at Parole Camp in Yercaud by the British. 

The spy in Kerala

To Sebastian Paul, a former Member of Parliament, who has written a biography titled Alleppey Vincent: Malayala Cinemayude Snapakan, Vincent confided that Beyse indeed had been a spy. But Paul didn't mention Beyse in the book because there was no mention of him in his notebooks of Vincent. Vincent had a degree and was a law student and politician. He had enough capability to assess a person.

Vincent cited six reasons to believe that Beyes had been a spy:

1. Madras always had a presence of spies. It had been the only city that was attacked by Germany during the First World War. The German cruiser S M S Emden attacked the port on September 22, 1914, and destroyed four British oil tankers.

Vellinakshatram poster

2. Vincent saw with Beyse several photos of Port Trust, boat house, Madras Sailors Club, and National Bank of India. The same places were the targets of Emden. While at Alapuzha for six months, Beyes showed keen interest in picturing the port and the Kerala coast. He left the studio and stayed at the guest house at the beach.

3. Germany had equipped the Nazi Gestapos with state-of-the-art cameras. Two Germans had co-operated with Indian language films before Beyse: Josef Wirsching, German cinematographer (1903-1967) and Bado Gus Walker, Cinematographer of Balan. Though Vincent knew Gus Walker, he had left for Germany. Nothing much is known about Guswalker also.

4. The Nuremberg trials began on November 25, 1945, and ended on October 1, 1946. The execution of those punished in the trial began the next year when the shooting of Vellinakshatram was in progress. Vincent saw a depressed Beyse suddenly becoming depressed asking him to oversee the shooting.

5. Beyse began speaking Malayalam within two months, without none tutoring him. He photographed visuals which had no connection with the movie.

6. Though Beyse had established a close rapport with Vincent, he distanced himself in the final days of the shooting.

It is not clear whether it was the quarrel in the Udaya studios or the aftermath of the Nuremberg trials that made Beyse disappear. He left one night with his wife without informing anyone. But others believe that Beyse did this because he suspected that people knew of his identity and feared that this would lead to his arrest here.

He was clever enough not to leave any trace, not even a photograph of his. But he left his camera at the location.

It is said that Beyse spent his later life in Australia while others believe that he spent the remaining years of his life in some remote village in Europe. Rumours were rife at that time that Beyse and his wife were eliminated in Kerala itself.

Vellinakshatram introduced several artists who proved their mettle later in the Malayalam film industry. Lyricist Abhayadev, music composer B A Chidambaranath, editor K D George, and actresses Miss Kumari and Baby Girija are among them.

Vincent the politician

Aleppey Vincent was born to Pollayil Vincent and Margarita as the youngest child, in Ambalappuzha taluk of Alappuzha district in the Indian state of Kerala.

When the proposed heroine of Balan, Kunjamma eloped with Sundaram Pillai, the assistant director of the movie, Vincent brought a new heroine M K Kamalam who was then working as a drama artist at Sebastian's drama troupe and introduced her to the director, S Nottani. Vincent was the first person to record his voice in a Malayalam cinema. He uttered the first line, ''Good Luck, everyone".

Udaya Studio

In the second Malayalam talkie, Jnanambika, both Vincent and Sebastian acted. Vincent acted in the film 'Oral Koody Kallanayi' in 1964 with Prem Nazir and in the 1974 film 'Kamini'. Vincent was lucky to work with M. G. R. in the Malayalam film Genova in 1953. It is the only Malayalam film M. G. R. ever acted in.

Vincent was having his own drama troupe based at Alapuzha and has presented several successful plays for a long period. He died on July 12, 1992.

Alleppey Vincent was perhaps the first film actor in the country to file his nomination papers for an election.

Despite their political differences, Vincent and T V Thomas remained fast friends. They even dressed alike in the white Jubba or kurta and white dhoti. In February 1948, an election to the Travancore legislative council was declared. The Congress decided to field Vincent as their candidate from Alapuzha. Vincent belonged to the Latin Catholic community that held sway in this area; the party thought to cash in on Vincent’s popularity as a film actor.

Months before the election, Congress kicked off its campaign. They used posters from Vincent’s films that had his face. A clever move by Thomas saw to it that the Communist Party did not field a candidate against Vincent. The other person in the fray was one Iyer, who contested as an independent.

Even before the filing of the nomination papers, there were rumours that the Dewan Sir C P Ramaswamy Iyer would issue instructions to reject Vincent’s nomination. The Congress party devised an alternate strategy. They decided to change the initials of Vincent’s name to S P instead of X.P. He followed his party’s direction and changed this in his nomination papers. The idea was to protect Vincent from being identified by the Dewan. 

However, the Dewan smelled a rat and directed his officers to reject Vincent’s nomination. Vincent’s nomination was rejected on the ground that he had changed his initials. The independent candidate was declared the winner. Thus Vincent lost out on being the first ever actor to participate in an election and even win it.

© Ramachandran 

1921: കുമാരനാശാൻ മലബാറിൽ

കുമാരനാശാൻ ടി കെ നാരായണനൊപ്പം 

മാപ്പിള ലഹളയുടെ എഴുപത്തഞ്ചാം വാർഷികം ആചരിച്ച 1996 ൽ വി ടി ഇന്ദുചൂഡൻ, ലഹളയെ വർഗ്ഗസമരമായി കാണുന്ന വക്രീകരണത്തെ വിമർശിച്ച് ഇങ്ങനെ എഴുതി: "കണ്ടവർ നിൽക്കട്ടെ, കേട്ടവർ പറയട്ടെ - എന്നൊരു ചൊല്ല് മലയാളത്തിലുണ്ട്. അതാണ് മാപ്പിള ലഹളയെപ്പറ്റി ചരിത്രകാരന്മാർ എന്നവകാശപ്പെട്ടു കൊണ്ട് ചില ബുദ്ധിജീവികൾ പറയുന്നത്. കുമാരനാശാൻ നേരിൽക്കണ്ട് എഴുതിയത് സ്വീകാര്യമല്ലെന്നും മാപ്പിള ലഹള പുരോഗമന വിപ്ലവമായിരുന്നു എന്നുമാണല്ലോ ഇവരുടെ നിലപാട്."

ഈ വാചകങ്ങളിലുള്ളത്, കുമാരനാശാൻ മാപ്പിള ലഹളയുടെ കെടുതികൾ നേരിൽ കണ്ടു എന്നാണ്. അങ്ങനെയെങ്കിൽ അതിന് തെളിവ് വേണം. തെളിവുണ്ടോ?

ഗുരുവിനൊപ്പം ആശാൻ 

തെളിവിന് വേണ്ടി റിട്ടയർ ചെയ്ത പൊലീസ് സൂപ്രണ്ട് കെ എൻ ബാലിൻറെ സഹായം ഞാൻ തേടി. സർവീസിലിരുന്നപ്പോൾ മിടുക്കനായിരുന്നു ബാൽ. ചരിത്രത്തിലാണ് അദ്ദേഹത്തിൻറെ ബിരുദം.

പൊലീസായതു കൊണ്ടല്ല ബാലിനോട് ഇക്കാര്യം തിരക്കിയത്. അദ്ദേഹം, കുമാരനാശാൻറെ ആത്മസുഹൃത്തായ ടി കെ നാരായണൻറെ മകൻ ആയതു കൊണ്ടാണ്. ബാൽ സാക്ഷ്യപ്പെടുത്തി: ആശാൻ മാപ്പിള ലഹളയുടെ ദുരന്തങ്ങൾ അറിയാൻ നാരായണൻറെ കൂടെ മലബാറിൽ പോയിരുന്നു. ശ്രീനാരായണഗുരുവും ആശാനും ആലോചിച്ച് നാരായണനെ മലബാറിൽ അയയ്ക്കാൻ തീരുമാനിച്ചു. അപ്പോൾ നാരായണൻറെ കൂടെ ആശാനും പോയി.

ഇക്കാര്യങ്ങൾ അമ്മ പന്തളം കറുത്തേരി നാരായണി പറഞ്ഞും ബാൽ കേട്ടിട്ടുണ്ട്. ഈഴവ സമുദായത്തിൽ നിന്നുള്ള ആദ്യ സ്‌കൂൾ അദ്ധ്യാപികയായ നാരായണി സാധാരണ വീട്ടമ്മ ആയിരുന്നില്ല; കാര്യവിവരം ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു.

മാപ്പിളലഹളയ്ക്ക് പിന്നാലെ, ഹിന്ദുക്കളുടെ ദുരിതാശ്വാസ പ്രവർത്തനത്തിന് ലഹോറിൽ നിന്ന് പണ്ഡിറ്റ് ഋഷിറാം ഉൾപ്പെടെ ആര്യസമാജം പ്രവർത്തകർ എത്തി. ആ സംഘത്തിൽ കൊട്ടാരക്കരക്കാരൻ ആർ വെങ്കിടാചലവും ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. പിൽക്കാലത്ത് വേദബന്ധു എന്ന പേരിൽ ആഴമുള്ള പുസ്തകങ്ങൾ എഴുതി. മാപ്പിളലഹളയെപ്പറ്റിയുള്ള ആദ്യ പുസ്തകം, 'മാപ്പിള വിദ്രോഹ്' അദ്ദേഹം എഴുതിയതാണ്. മലബാറിൽ ആര്യസമാജം നടത്തിയ ദുരിതാശ്വാസ പ്രവർത്തനങ്ങളും മാപ്പിള ക്രൂരതകളും അതിൽ വിവരിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട്. അതിനെ ആധാരമാക്കിയാണ്, സവർക്കർ 'മാപ്പിള' എന്ന നോവൽ എഴുതിയത്. എന്നാൽ, വേദബന്ധുവിൻറെ പുസ്തകത്തിനും മുൻപാണ്, ആശാൻറെ 'ദുരവസ്ഥ' വന്നത്.

ഋഷിറാം, വെങ്കിടാചലം എന്നിവരുമായി ആശാനും നാരായണനും ബന്ധപ്പെട്ടിരുന്നുവെന്ന് ബാൽ ഓർക്കുന്നു. ആശാൻ മലബാറിൽ പോയിരുന്നുവെന്ന് തെളിയിക്കുന്ന ഒരു വാചകം, ആശാൻ ആലപ്പുഴ മുസ്ലിം യുവജന സംഘത്തിന് അയച്ച മറുപടിയിലുമുണ്ട്.

1097 ചിങ്ങത്തിലാണ് കുമാരനാശാൻറെ  ഭാഷയില്‍, തെക്കെമലയാം ജില്ലയില്‍ മാപ്പിള ലഹള ആരംഭിക്കുന്നത്. 1097 ഇടവത്തിലാണ് 'ദുരവസ്ഥ' എഴുതിത്തുടങ്ങുന്നത്. മൂന്ന് മാസം കഴിഞ്ഞപ്പോള്‍ 1700 ശീലിൽ പൂർത്തിയായി.പതിവിൽ നിന്ന് വിട്ട് വേഗം കവിത അച്ചടിക്കണമെന്ന് ആശാൻ ആഗ്രഹിച്ചിരുന്നതായി ഡയറിക്കുറിപ്പുകൾ വ്യക്തമാക്കുന്നു.'ആപത്തിൽ പാപമില്ല'എന്ന ശീർഷകത്തിൽ മെയ് 25 ന് തുടങ്ങിയ കവിത ഓഗസ്റ്റ് 30 ന് തീർന്നപ്പോൾ പേര് മാറ്റി.സെപ്റ്റംബർ രണ്ടിന് പകർത്തി,ഏഴിന് അച്ചടിക്ക് കൊടുത്തു.

കവിത വലിയ കോളിളക്കം ഉണ്ടാക്കി മുസ്ലിംകൾ പ്രതിഷേധിച്ചു.പ്രതിഷേധ യോഗങ്ങൾ ചേർന്നു.ആലപ്പുഴ മുസ്ലിം യുവജന സംഘം കവിതയ്ക്ക് എതിരെ പ്രമേയം പാസാക്കി.ഇത് ആശാന് അയച്ചു കൊടുത്തു.ആശാൻ മറുപടി എഴുതി:

"ദുരവസ്ഥ എന്ന എൻറെ കൃതിയിൽ നിങ്ങളുടെ മതത്തെയും സമുദായത്തെയും പൊതുവെ സ്പർശിക്കുന്നതായി സഭ്യേതരമായ ഒരു വാക്കും പ്രയോഗിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളതായി ഓർക്കുന്നില്ല.മലബാറിൽ ലഹള നടത്തിയ അക്രമികളായ മുഹമ്മദീയരെയും,മതഭ്രാന്തിനെ മുൻ നിർത്തിയുള്ള അവരുടെ പൈശാചികമായ പ്രവൃത്തികളെയും അതിൽ കാവ്യയോഗ്യമായ വിധത്തിൽ വർണിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ട്.ആ സന്ദർഭങ്ങളിൽ രസാനുഗുണമായും ലഹളയെ സംബന്ധിച്ചു ഞാൻ അറിഞ്ഞിട്ടുള്ള വാസ്തവങ്ങളെ അടിസ്ഥാനമാക്കിയും ഞാൻ ചെയ്തിട്ടുള്ള പദപ്രയോഗങ്ങൾ അവരെയും അവരുടെ പ്രവൃത്തിയെയും മാത്രം കുറിക്കുന്നതാണ്.ദൂരസ്ഥമായ മതത്തെയോ സമുദായത്തെയോ അതുകൾ വിവക്ഷിക്കുന്നില്ല.ശാന്തമായ മനഃസ്ഥിതിയോട് കൂടി പുസ്തകം ദയവ് ചെയ്ത് ഒന്നുകൂടി വായിച്ചു നോക്കിയാൽ വാസ്തവം നിങ്ങൾക്ക് തന്നെ വെളിവാകുന്നതാണ്."

"ലഹളയെ സംബന്ധിച്ചു ഞാൻ അറിഞ്ഞിട്ടുള്ള വാസ്തവങ്ങൾ" എന്ന് ആശാൻ പറഞ്ഞതിൽ കാണേണ്ടത്, അദ്ദേഹം നേരിട്ടു കണ്ട കാഴ്ചകൾ തന്നെ.

തിരുവനന്തപുരത്ത് മുസ്ലിം ബുദ്ധി ജീവികൾ യോഗം കൂടി.വക്കം അബ്ദുൽ ഖാദർ മൗലവി ആയിരുന്നു അധ്യക്ഷൻ.യോഗ തീരുമാനപ്രകാരം,മൗലവിയും കെ എം സീതി സാഹിബും കുമാരനാശാനെ കണ്ടു.കവിത പിൻവലിക്കാനുള്ള അവരുടെ അപേക്ഷ ആശാൻ നിരസിച്ചു. നിരസിക്കാൻ കാരണവും നേരിട്ട് ബോധ്യപ്പെട്ട വസ്തുതകൾ തന്നെ.

'ദുരവസ്ഥ' എഴുതി താമസിയാതെ 1924 ജനുവരി 16 ന് പല്ലനയാറ്റിൽ റെഡീമർ ബോട്ടപകടത്തിൽ ആശാൻ മരിച്ചു. അവസാനത്തെ അത്താഴം ആശാൻ കഴിച്ചത് ടി കെ നാരായണൻറെ കൂടെ ആയിരുന്നുവെന്ന് കെ എൻ ബാൽ ഓർക്കുന്നു. തണുപ്പു കാലം ആയതിനാൽ, നാരായണൻ അപ്പോൾ ധരിച്ചിരുന്ന ഓവർകോട്ട് ഊരി ആശാന് കൊടുത്തു. കോട്ടിൻറെ കീശയിൽ ഋഷിറാമും മറ്റൊരു ആര്യസമാജം പ്രവർത്തകനും നാരായണന് എഴുതിയ കത്തുകളും ആര്യസമാജം സ്ഥാപകൻ ദയാനന്ദ സരസ്വതിയുടെ ലഘു ജീവചരിത്രവും ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. അതെടുത്തു മാറ്റാൻ നാരായണൻ മറന്നിരുന്നു. ആശാൻ ധരിച്ചിരുന്ന കോട്ടിൻറെ കീശയിൽ ഇവയുണ്ടായിരുന്നുവെന്ന് അപകടശേഷം പൊലീസ് തയ്യാറാക്കിയ മഹസ്സറിൽ ഉണ്ട്.

ശ്രീനാരായണ ഗുരുവിൻറെ ഗൃഹസ്ഥ ശിഷ്യരിൽ പ്രധാനി ആയിരുന്നു ടി കെ നാരായണൻ; എസ് എൻ ഡി പി യോഗത്തിൻറെ ആദ്യ സഞ്ചാര സെക്രട്ടറി. ആശാൻ, ടി കെ മാധവൻ, പരവൂർ കേശവനാശാൻ തുടങ്ങിയവർക്ക് സംഘടനാ പ്രവർത്തനത്തിലും പത്രപ്രവർത്തനത്തിലും ശക്തമായ പിൻതുണ നൽകി. 'വിവേകോദയം', ടി കെ മാധവൻറെ 'ദേശാഭിമാനി', അമ്മാവനായ കേശവനാശാൻറെ 'സുജനാ നന്ദിനി' എന്നിവയുടെ പത്രാധിപർ ആയിരുന്നു. സ്വന്തമായി 'പാഞ്ചജന്യം' എന്ന പത്രവും 'അമൃതഭാരതി' എന്ന പ്രതിവാര പത്രവും നടത്തി. 1921 ൽ ഗുരുവിൻറെ ആദ്യ ജീവചരിത്രം എഴുതി. ശ്രീരാമകൃഷ്ണ പരമഹംസൻ, സ്വാമി വിവേകാനന്ദൻ, രാജാറാം മോഹൻ റായ് എന്നിവരുടെ ലഘു ജീവചരിത്രങ്ങളും എഴുതി. ആര്യസമാജം, ബ്രഹ്മവിദ്യാ സംഘം എന്നിവയുടെ പുസ്തകങ്ങൾ, 'ആരോഗ്യ രത്നാകരം' ഉൾപ്പെടെ പരിഭാഷ ചെയ്തു. 'ഹനുമാൻറെ പൂണൂൽ' സവർണ കോമരങ്ങളെ ചൊടിപ്പിച്ചു.

ടി കെ നാരായണൻ 

കൊല്ലം ഇംഗ്ലീഷ് മിഷനറി സ്‌കൂളിലും മദ്രാസ് സർവകലാശാലയിലും പഠിച്ച നാരായണൻ കൊല്ലത്ത് തുടങ്ങിയ ഇംഗ്ലീഷ് ഇൻസ്റ്റിട്യൂട്ട്, കേരളത്തിലെ ട്യൂട്ടോറിയൽ പ്രസ്ഥാനത്തിന് വഴികാട്ടി ആയിരുന്നു. 1904 ഒക്ടോബർ 16 ന് സ്വന്തം നാടായ പരവൂർ പൊഴിക്കരയിൽ നാരായണൻ സംഘടിപ്പിച്ച യോഗത്തിലാണ്, ശ്രീനാരായണ ഗുരു താലികെട്ട് കല്യാണം, പുളികുടി അടിയന്തരം, പുലകുളി തുടങ്ങിയ അനാചാരങ്ങൾ അവസാനിപ്പിക്കാനും വിവാഹം പരിഷ്കരിക്കാനും ആഹ്വാനം ചെയ്തത്.

ഇനി നമുക്ക് അന്വേഷിക്കാനുള്ളത്, ആശാനെയും നാരായണനെയും മലബാറിലേക്ക് മാപ്പിള ലഹളയ്ക്ക് ശേഷം അയയ്ക്കാനുള്ള ആര്യസമാജ ബന്ധം ശ്രീനാരായണ ഗുരുവിന് ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നോ എന്നതാണ്. ആര്യസമാജവുമായി മാപ്പിളലഹളയ്ക്ക് ശേഷം ഗുരുവിന് ശക്തമായ ബന്ധമുണ്ടായിരുന്നതിന് തെളിവുണ്ട്.

ടി ഭാസ്‌കരൻ എഴുതിയ ജീവചരിത്രത്തിൽ, "ഗുരു:1090 മുതൽ മഹാസമാധി വരെ" എന്ന അനുബന്ധത്തിൽ, ഇങ്ങനെ പറയുന്നു:

"1098-ൽ പാണാവള്ളി ശ്രീകണ്ഠേശ്വര പ്രതിഷ്ഠ നടത്തി. പിറ്റേക്കൊല്ലം (1924) വ്യസനകരമായ ഒരു സംഭവം ഉണ്ടായി. പല്ലന റെഡീമർ ബോട്ടപകടത്തിൽ കുമാരനാശാൻ മരിച്ചു. അന്നു വെളുപ്പാൻ കാലത്തു സ്വാമികൾ ശിവഗിരിയിൽ വിശേഷാൽ പ്രാർത്ഥന നടത്തിച്ചു. ആശാൻറെ ചരമവാർത്ത പിന്നീടാണ് അറിഞ്ഞത്.

"അക്കൊല്ലം സ്വാമികൾ ആലുവായിൽ സർവ്വമത സമ്മേളനം വിളിച്ചുകൂട്ടി. വാദിക്കാനും ജയിക്കാനുമല്ല, അറിയാനും അറിയിക്കാനുമാണ് എന്ന് സ്വാമികൾ സമ്മേളന കവാടത്തിൽ എഴുതിവപ്പിച്ചു. ആശയപരമായ ഏതു സംവാദവും ഈ മനോഭാവത്തോടെയാണു നടത്തേണ്ടതെന്ന് എടുത്തുപറയേണ്ടതില്ലല്ലൊ. രണ്ടു ദിവസമായി നടന്ന സമ്മേളനത്തിൽ അനേകം മതപണ്ഡിതന്മാർ പങ്കെടുത്തു. സ്വാമികൾ രണ്ടു ദിവസവും സമ്മേളനവേദിയിൽ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു. സമ്മേളനത്തിൻറെ  ലക്ഷ്യങ്ങൾ വിവരിച്ചുകൊണ്ട് സത്യവ്രത സ്വാമികൾ സ്വാഗത പ്രസംഗം നടത്തി. സി.വി. കുഞ്ഞുരാമൻ കൃതജ്ഞത പ്രകാശിപ്പിച്ചു. സിലോണിൽ നിന്നൊരു ബുദ്ധഭിക്ഷു സമ്മേളനത്തിൽ സംബന്ധിച്ചിരുന്നു. ബുദ്ധമതത്തെ കുറിച്ചു സംസാരിച്ചത് മഞ്ചേരി രാമയ്യരും രാമകൃഷ്ണയ്യരും ആണ്. ക്രിസ്തുമതത്തെക്കുറിച്ചു കെ. കെ. കുരുവിളയും ഇസ്ലാം മതത്തെക്കുറിച്ചു മഹമ്മദു മൗലവിയും ബ്രഹ്മസമാജത്തെക്കുറിച്ചു സ്വാമി ശിവപ്രസാദും ആര്യസമാജത്തെക്കുറിച്ചു പണ്ഡിറ്റ് ഋഷിറാമും പ്രസംഗിച്ചു.

"1100 കുംഭത്തിൽ ഗാന്ധിജി ശിവഗിരി സന്ദർശിച്ചു.ആര്യസമാജ പ്രവർത്ത‌കനായ സ്വാമി ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദജി ശിവഗിരിയിൽ വന്ന് ഗുരുവിനെ അക്കൊല്ലം സന്ദർശിക്കുകയുണ്ടായി.

സ്വാമി ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദയുമായി നടന്ന സംഭാഷണത്തിനിടയിൽ ഗുരു പറഞ്ഞ നർമ്മങ്ങളിൽ ചെയ്തതൊന്നും പോരാ എന്ന ധ്വനിയുണ്ട്. പ്രസക്ത ഭാഗം:

ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദ: അധഃകൃതരുടെ ഉദ്ധാരണത്തിനു സ്വാമികൾ പലതും ചെയ്തിട്ടുണ്ടെന്നറിയാം.

ഗുരു: നാം ഒന്നും പ്രവർത്തിക്കുന്നില്ലല്ലൊ.

ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദ: പ്രവർത്തിയുണ്ടാകാതിരിക്കുകയില്ല. പ്രവർത്തിയുണ്ടെങ്കിലെ നിവൃത്തിയുള്ളുവല്ലോ.

ഗുരു: ഇവിടെ നമുക്ക് ഒരു നിവൃത്തിയും ഇല്ല.

ഇങ്ങനെ ചെയ്തില്ലെന്നും ചെയ്യുന്നില്ലെന്നും തോന്നിയതിനാൽ ഗുരു നിർത്താത്ത സഞ്ചാരമായിരുന്നു. ദയാനന്ദ സരസ്വതിയും ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദയും ഹിന്ദു സമൂഹത്തിലെ ഉച്ചനീചത്വങ്ങൾക്കെതിരെ നടത്തിയ പ്രക്ഷോഭം അപാരമാണ്. ദയാനന്ദ സരസ്വതിയുടെ 'സത്യാർത്ഥ പ്രകാശ'വും ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദയുടെ 'ഹിന്ദുസംഘടൻ' എന്ന പുസ്തകവും അവയിറങ്ങിയ കാലം വച്ചു നോക്കിയാൽ, വലിയ വിപ്ലവങ്ങളാണ്. അയിത്തോച്ചാടനം കോൺഗ്രസിൻറെ പരിപാടിയാക്കാത്തതിനാൽ ഗാന്ധിയിൽ നിന്നകന്നയാളാണ്, ശ്രദ്ധാനന്ദ. ഇരുവരും മതംമാറ്റത്തിന് എതിരുമായിരുന്നു. അത്തരം നിലപാടുകളോട് ചേർന്നു നിന്നവരാണ് ഗുരുവും ആശാനും എന്ന കാര്യത്തിൽ തർക്കമില്ല.

പത്രാധിപർ എന്ന നിലയിൽ മാപ്പിള ലഹളയെപ്പറ്റി ആശാൻറെ ഒരു ലേഖനം ഇല്ലാതെ പോയത് അദ്ദേഹം തൊഴുത്തിൽ കുത്തു കാരണം 1919 ൽ എസ് എൻ ഡി പി സെക്രട്ടറി സ്ഥാനം ഒഴിഞ്ഞതിനൊപ്പം 'വിവേകോദയം' പത്രാധിപർ അല്ലാതായി എന്നതു കൊണ്ടാകാം. 1921 ൽ അദ്ദേഹം 'പ്രതിഭ' എന്ന സാഹിത്യ മാസികയുടെ പത്രാധിപർ ആയി. ആലുവയിൽ യൂണിയൻ ടൈൽ ഫാക്ടറി തുടങ്ങിയതും ആ വർഷം തന്നെ. സമീപത്തെ കൊട്ടാര ജലാശയത്തെ മലിനപ്പെടുത്തതിനാൽ ഫാക്ടറി പുഴയോരത്തെ മറ്റൊരു സ്ഥലം വാങ്ങി അങ്ങോട്ടു മാറ്റി. പഴയ സ്ഥലം എസ് എൻ ഡി പി ക്ക് നൽകി. അവിടെയാണ് അദ്വൈതാശ്രമം ഉയർന്നത്. വിദ്യാഭ്യാസ ഡയറക്ടർ രാമസ്വാമി അയ്യരുടെ സ്ഥലം തോന്നയ്ക്കലിൽ വാങ്ങി അങ്ങോട് മാറിയതും ഇക്കാലത്താണ്. ഓട് ഫാക്ടറിയിലേക്ക് വരുമ്പോൾ ആയിരുന്നു, മരണം. 

ജീവിത രേഖകൾ 

പണ്ഡിറ്റ് ഋഷിറാം (1893 -1970):

അംബാലയിലെ വൈശ്യ കുടുംബത്തിൽ ജനിച്ചു. ആര്യസമാജ നേതാവ് പണ്ഡിറ്റ് ഹൻസ് രാജ് സ്ഥാപിച്ച ദയാനന്ദ് ആംഗ്ലോ വേദിക് കോളജിൽ പഠിച്ചു. 1917 ൽ ബിരുദം നേടി ആര്യസമാജ പ്രവർത്തനത്തിൽ മുഴുകി. 1921 ലെ മാപ്പിളലഹളക്കാലത്ത് പഞ്ചാബ് ആര്യ പ്രതിനിധി സഭ അദ്ദേഹത്തെ മലബാറിൽ ദുരിതാശ്വാസ പ്രവർത്തനത്തിന് നിയോഗിച്ചു. മലബാറിൽ വ്യാപകമായി യാത്ര ചെയ്ത അദ്ദേഹം മാപ്പിളമാർ ബലമായി മതം മാറ്റിയ ആയിരക്കണക്കിന് ഹിന്ദുക്കളെ മടക്കി കൊണ്ടു വന്നു. കോഴിക്കോടും പൊന്നാനിയിലും ആര്യസമാജം സ്ഥാപിച്ചു.

ഋഷിറാം 

കേരളത്തിലെ സാമൂഹ്യ പരിഷ്കരണത്തിൽ വലിയ പങ്കു വഹിച്ചു. ശ്രീനാരായണഗുരുവുമായി ചർച്ചകൾ നടത്തി. 1923 ൽ ആലുവയിൽ ഗുരു സംഘടിപ്പിച്ച സർവ മത സമ്മേളനത്തിൽ ആര്യസമാജത്തെ പ്രതിനിധീകരിച്ചു.

കേരള ദൗത്യത്തിനു ശേഷം, ഋഷിറാം വേദപ്രചാരണത്തിന് കിഴക്കേ ആഫ്രിക്കയിൽ പോയി. 1930 -1934 ൽ കൊൽക്കത്ത പ്രധാന കേന്ദ്രമാക്കി പ്രവർത്തിച്ചു. 1936 ൽ വീണ്ടും വിദേശത്തു പോയി.

വേദബന്ധു ശർമ്മ ( ആർ വെങ്കിടാചല അയ്യർ 1901 -1995 )

കേരളത്തിലെ സംസ്കൃതപണ്ഡിതരിൽ പ്രമുഖനും ആര്യസമാജത്തിന്റെ പ്രമുഖപ്രവർത്തകനുമായിരുന്നു വേദബന്ധു ശർമ്മ എന്ന പേരിൽ പ്രസിദ്ധനായ ആർ. വെങ്കിടാചല അയ്യർ. 1921-ലെ മാപ്പിള ലഹളക്കാലത്ത് നിർബന്ധിത മതപരിവർത്തനത്തിന് വിധേയരായവരെ തിരികെ ഹിന്ദുമതത്തിലേക്ക് പരിവർത്തനം ചെയ്യിക്കുക എന്ന ഉദ്ദേശ്യത്തോടുകൂടി കേരളത്തിലെത്തിയ ആര്യസമാജം പ്രവർത്തകൻ ഋഷി റാമിനോടൊപ്പമായിരുന്നു വേദബന്ധുവിന്റെ വരവ്. ഋഷി റാമിന്റെ ദ്വിഭാഷിയും സഹായിയുമായിരുന്നു വേദബന്ധു.

രാമകൃഷ്ണയ്യരുടെയും ശ്രീമതി സീതാലക്ഷ്മി അമ്മാളിന്റെയും പുത്രനായി 1901 ഏപ്രിൽ 20-ന് കൊട്ടാരക്കരയിൽ തൃക്കണ്ണമംഗലത്ത് ജനിച്ചു. ഭാര്യ സരസ്വതി ദേവി.

കൊട്ടാരക്കര ഇംഗ്ലീഷ് സ്‌കൂളിലും ബനാറസ് ഹിന്ദു സർവകലാശാലയിലും പഠനം.കാശിയിലെ പണ്ഡിതരിൽ നിന്ന് വേദം പഠിച്ചു.സംസ്‌കൃതത്തിൽ എം എ.

ഗാന്ധിയുടെ നിസ്സഹകരണ പ്രസ്ഥാനത്തിൽ ആകൃഷ്ടനായി കോൺഗ്രസിൽ ചേർന്നു.എന്നാൽ, ദേശീയത അദ്ദേഹത്തെ എത്തിച്ചത് ആര്യ സമാജത്തിലാണ്. അങ്ങനെ സമാജ കേന്ദ്രമായ ലഹോറിൽ എത്തി. സംസ്കൃതത്തിൽ എം എ ബിരുദം നേടിയ ശേഷം ലഹോറിലും വിവിധ ഉത്തരേന്ത്യൻ നഗരങ്ങളിലും ആര്യസമാജ ഗുരുകുലങ്ങളിൽ പ്രവർത്തിച്ചു. സ്വാതന്ത്ര്യസമരത്തിലും ആര്യസമാജത്തിന്റെ പ്രേഷിതപ്രവർത്തനങ്ങളിലും മുഴുകി. ധാരാളം വായിച്ചു യാത്രചെയ്തു നിരവധി ഭാഷകൾ കൈകാര്യം ചെയ്തു കേരളത്തിൽ ആര്യസമാജത്തിന്റെ പ്രവർത്തനം ആരംഭിച്ചവരിൽ പ്രമുഖനാണ്.കോഴിക്കോട്ടും പൊന്നാനിയിലും ആര്യ സമാജ കേന്ദ്രങ്ങൾ സ്ഥാപിച്ചു.കൽ‌പാത്തി അഗ്രഹാര വഴിയിൽ ദളിതർക്ക് സഞ്ചരിക്കാൻ വേണ്ടി സമരം ചെയ്തു.

മാപ്പിള ലഹളക്കാലത്ത് 1921 ഒക്ടോബറിൽ മലബാറിൽ എത്തി, മാപ്പിളമാർ മതം മാറ്റിയ 2600 ഹിന്ദുക്കളെ മടക്കിക്കൊണ്ടു വരുന്ന പ്രവർത്തനത്തിൽ മുഴുകി. ഇന്ത്യ വിഭജന ശേഷം ഇന്ത്യയിൽ എത്തുമ്പോൾ വലിയ ചുമട് വേദ സാഹിത്യം കൂടെ ഉണ്ടായിരുന്നു.

വേദബന്ധു 

ഹോഷിയാർപുർ റിസർച്ച് ഇൻസ്റ്റിറ്റ്യൂട്ടിന്റെ അസിസ്റ്റന്റ് ഡയറക്റ്ററായിരുന്നു. വേദസാഹിത്യം കേരളത്തിനു പരിചയ്പ്പെടുത്തിയവരിൽ പ്രമുഖൻ . സ്വാമി ദയാനന്ദസരസ്വതി യുടെ വൈദിക സാഹിത്യം മലയാളത്തിലേക്ക് മിക്കവാറും പരിഭാഷപ്പെടുത്തിയിട്ടുണ്ട്. कृण्वन्तो विश्वमार्यम् ~വിശ്വത്തെ ശ്രേഷ്‌ഠമാക്കുക Make This World Enlightened എന്ന ആശയത്തിന്റെ സ്ഥപനത്തിനും പ്രചാരണത്തിനുമായി പ്രവർത്തിച്ചു. 1995 നവംബർ 20-ന് ബംഗളൂരുവിൽ മരണം.

പുസ്തകങ്ങൾ:

സത്യാർത്ഥപ്രകാശം പരിഭാഷ, ഋഗ്വേദ പ്രവേശിക, സന്ധ്യയും അഗ്നിഹോത്രവും, അർത്ഥവിജ്ഞാനം, രസഭാരതി, ഭാരതീയ കാവ്യ ശാസ്ത്രം, ജാതിയും പരിവർത്തനവും, പുരുഷ സൂക്തം ഭാഷ്യം, സമുദായ പരിവർത്തനം, മലബാർ മാപ്പിള ലഹള, Malabar Mappila Riots, Mappila Vidroh (Hindi)

© Ramachandran 






 

MYSTERY BEHIND THE DEATH OF SHASTRI AND HOMI BHABHA

The shocking details revealed in a book

Robert Crowley, the second-in-command of the CIA’s Directorate of Operations (in charge of covert operations), had revealed that the CIA killed India’s Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and nuclear physicist Homi Jehangir Bhabha. Both were killed in January 1966, within a gap of just 13 days.

Shastri died in Tashkent, Uzbekistan (then the Soviet Union) on 11 January 1966, one day after signing a peace treaty to end the 1965 Indo-Pakistan War.

Bhabha died when Air India Flight 101 named Kanchenjunga, crashed near Mont Blanc on 24 January 1966.

The revelation comes in a 2013 book titled Conversation With The Crow by Gregory Douglas. This was released as an e-book today.

Shastri with Bhabha

On 8 October 2000, Robert Trumbull Crowley, once a leader of the CIA's Clandestine Operations Division, died in a Washington hospital of heart failure and the end effects of Alzheimer's Disease.

Known as “The Crow” within the agency, Robert T. Crowley joined the CIA at its inception and spent his entire career in the Directorate of Plans, also known as the “Department of Dirty Tricks”.

Bob Crowley first contacted Gregory Douglas in 1993 when he found out that Douglas was about to publish his first book on Heinrich Mueller, the former head of the Gestapo who had become a secret, long-time asset to the CIA.

They began a series of long and often very informative telephone conversations that lasted for four years. Douglas became so entranced with some of the material that Crowley began to share with him that he secretly began to record their conversations, later transcribing them word for word, planning to incorporate some or all of the material in later publications.

In the book, which has been recorded as conversations, Crowley says: “Was, Gregory, let’s use the past tense if you please. The name was Homi Bhabha. That one was dangerous, believe me. He had an unfortunate accident. He was flying to Vienna to stir up more trouble when his 707 had a bomb go off in the cargo hold and they all came down on a high mountain way up in the Alps. No real evidence and the world was much safer.”

To a question by Douglas, was Bhabha alone on the plane? Crowley replied: “No, it was a commercial Air India flight.”

Crowley continued: “Then don’t worry about it. We could have blown it up over Vienna but we decided the high mountains were much better for the bits and pieces to come down on. I think a possible death or two among mountain goats is much preferable than bringing down a huge plane right over a big city.” 

Crowley also claimed: “Well, I call it as I see it. At the time, it was our best shot. And we nailed Shastri as well. Another cow-loving raghead”.

This disparaging remark about Shastri underlines the fact that the US never liked Hindu nationalists; they always batted for pseudo-secularists like Nehru. Shastri was a Sanskrit scholar from Benares Hindu University.

Crowley told Douglas: “Gregory, you say you don’t know about these people. Believe me, they were close to getting a bomb and so what if they nuked their deadly Paki enemies? So what? Too many people in both countries. Breed like rabbits and full of snake-worshipping twits. I don’t for the life of me see what the Brits wanted in India. And then threaten us? They were in the sack with the Russians, I told you. Maybe they could nuke the Panama Canal or Los Angeles. We don’t know that for sure, but it is not impossible.”

When Douglas asked who Shastri was, Crowley said, “A political type who started the program in the first place. Bhabha was a genius and he could get things done, so we aced both of them.”

“And we let certain people there know that there was more where that came from. We should have hit the chinks, too, while we were at it, but they were a tougher target. Did I tell you about the idea to wipe out Asia’s rice crops? We developed a disease that would have wiped rice off the map there and it’s their staple diet. The fu***ng rice growers here got wind of it and raised such a stink we canned the whole thing. The theory was that the disease could spread around and hurt their pocketbooks. If the Mao people invade Alaska, we can tell the rice people it’s all their fault,” Crowley said.

“The only thing the Communists understand is brute force. India was quieter after Bhabha croaked. We could never get to Mao but at one time, the Russians and we were discussing the how and when of the project. Oh yes, sometimes we do business with the other side. Probably more than you realize,” Crowley said.

India's nuclear programme

In August 1947, the partition of British India created the independent Republic of India and the Dominion of Pakistan. Shortly afterwards, a group of Indian scientists led by physicist Homi Bhabha—sometimes called “the Indian Oppenheimer”—convinced Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to invest in the development of nuclear energy. The subsequent 1948 Atomic Energy Act created the Indian Atomic Energy Commission “to provide for the development and control of atomic energy and purposes connected therewith”

In its early stages, the Indian nuclear program was primarily concerned with developing nuclear energy rather than weapons. Nehru, who called the bomb a “symbol of evil,” was adamant that India’s nuclear program pursue only peaceful applications. Nehru nonetheless left the door open to weapons development when he noted, “Of course, if we are compelled as a nation to use it for other purposes, possibly no pious sentiments of any of us will stop the nation from using it that way.” India also opposed the United States Baruch Plan, which proposed the international control of nuclear energy, because it “sought to prohibit national research and development in atomic energy production.”

Serious development did not start until 1954 when construction began on the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) at Trombay. Essentially the Indian equivalent to Los Alamos, BARC served as the primary research facility for India’s nuclear program. This period also saw a massive increase in government spending on atomic research and heightened efforts for international scientific collaboration. In 1955, Canada agreed to provide India with a nuclear reactor based on the National Research Experimental Reactor (NRX) at Chalk River. The United States also agreed to provide heavy water for the reactor under the auspices of the “Atoms for Peace” program. The Canada India Reactor Utility Services—more commonly known by its acronym, CIRUS—went critical in July 1960. Although billed as peaceful, CIRUS produced most of the weapons-grade plutonium used in India’s first nuclear test.

Crowley

Although tension with Pakistan was later a contributing factor to India’s nuclear weapons program, it was actually the conflict with China that first prompted India to build an atomic bomb. In October 1962, a war broke out between the two countries over a disagreement regarding the Himalayan border. India appealed to both the Soviet Union and the United States for assistance, but the two superpowers were at the time distracted by the ongoing Cuban Missile Crisis. The month-long Sino-Indian War ended in victory for China and humiliation for India.

China also tested its first atomic bomb in October 1964, heightening the need for a nuclear deterrent in the eyes of some Indian officials. Homi Bhabha, for example, urged the Indian government to approve an atomic bomb program, arguing in one speech that “atomic weapons give a State possessing them in adequate numbers a deterrent power against attack from a much stronger State.” Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri was opposed to the bomb, but Bhabha convinced him that India could use nuclear weapons for peaceful purposes, such as engineering. According to Bhabha, India was not developing nuclear weapons, but “peaceful nuclear explosions” (PNEs). Shastri, for his part, affirmed, “I do not know what may happen later, but our present policy is not to make an atom bomb and it is the right policy”.

During this period, Bhabha frequently appealed to the United States to support Indian PNEs through its Project Plowshare program. In February 1965, Bhabha visited Washington, DC to pitch the idea of nuclear cooperation. He met with Under Secretary of State George Ball, who reported, “Dr Bhabha explained that if India went all out, it could produce a device in 18 months; with a U.S. blueprint it could do the job in six months”. Although the accuracy of this statement was debatable, it was clear that Bhabha badly wanted the bomb. In the end, however, the United States decided against nuclear cooperation with India.

The year 1966 saw significant changes in the Indian nuclear program. In January, Prime Minister Shastri died of a heart attack and Indira Gandhi—the daughter of former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and a strong proponent of nuclear weapons—took his place. Less than two weeks later, Homi Bhabha died in a plane crash. Physicist Raja Ramanna, who worked under Bhabha beginning in 1964, was named the new head of BARC and was the principal designer of India’s first nuclear device.

Thus, 1966 was a decisive year for India and the immediate beneficiary of the murder of Shastri was Indira Gandhi.

While CIA drug running, money-launderings and brutal assassinations are very often strongly rumoured and suspected, it has so far not been possible to actually pin them down but it is more than possible that the publication of the transcribed and detailed Crowley-Douglas conversations will do a great deal towards accomplishing this.

The claims made by Crowley sound believable as Bhabha had announced over the radio in October 1965, just months before his death, that India could build its own nuclear bomb in 18 months. However, the CIA did not succeed in stopping India from becoming a nuclear power as India went on to test its first atomic bomb code-named "smiling Buddha" at Rajasthan's Pokharan on 18 May 1974.

Crowley co-authored The New KGB: Engine of Soviet Power with William R. Corson. Released in 1985, the book asserts that the KGB took control of the Communist Party and the Soviet Union. He was a source for David Wise's 1992 book Molehunt.

Reference:

Bhatia, Vandana. "Change in the U.S. Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy Toward India (1998–2005): Accommodating the Anomaly." University of Alberta (Canada), 2012.

Perkovich, George. “Bhabha's quest for the bomb.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 56, no. 3 (May/June 2000): 54-63.

Reed, Thomas C. and Danny B. Stillman. The Nuclear Express: A Political History of the Bomb and Its Proliferation. Minneapolis, MN: Zenith Press, 2009

© Ramachandran 

The G7 Summit and India Buying Oil From Russia

 

The G7 is perplexed and confused by the Ukraine crisis

Scarred by reliance on Russian energy that has hampered several European nations from going all out to punish Russia, the just-concluded G7 summit was also warily looking at its systemic rival, China.  The summit in Germany was dominated by manoeuvers to tighten the noose around Vladimir Putin without leading to disastrous spillovers- a backlash among Western consumers, starvation in a rain grain-starved global South and a breakdown in the global order are imminent unless the West shows wisdom.

The summit devised a $600 billion plan for the developing world, as a counter to China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It is called the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) and is a relaunch of an unclear scheme unveiled at last year's G7 meet in Britain. 

The plan calls on G7 leaders to raise the fund over five years to launch infrastructure projects in middle and low-income countries. The U.S. has promised to raise $200bn of the total through grants, federal funds and private investment, while the EU has announced a further 300bn euros.

Unlike BRI, the one proposed by the G7 would provide funding largely from private investors. The G7 fund will focus on climate initiatives, among other projects, including a $2 billion solar farm investment in Angola, $320 million for hospital construction in the Ivory Coast, a vaccine manufacturing facility in Senegal, a 1,609 km submarine telecommunications cable connecting Singapore to France via Egypt and the Horn of Africa, and $40 million to promote regional energy trade in Southeast Asia.

Ban on Russian Gold and Cap on Oil

Ahead of the summit, London announced that the U.K., along with the U.S., Japan and Canada, would ban new imports of Russian gold to tighten the sanctions. The U.K. said that Russian gold exports reached around $15.5 billion in 2021 and that this figure has gone up since sanctions were imposed as a means of getting around them. Russia accounted for about five percent of all gold exports in 2020 and 90 percent of Russia's output went to G7 countries -- mostly to Britain.

The new sanction would have only a limited impact; similar to energy products, Russia could contain the damage by turning to emerging markets.

Twin caps on the price of Russian oil and pipeline gas to slash the Kremlin’s revenues also gathered support at the summit. The gas cap would operate simply by European countries refusing to pay above an as-yet-unspecified fixed price for Russian gas. But the idea of putting a cap on Russian oil would be unfeasible in reality, and these absurd measures reflect the unfathomable dilemma of the West.

Moreover, Germany is queasy about price caps. It fears a bust-up inside the EU over the proposal and that Putin may simply turn off the supplies of gas to Europe. A cut-off now would leave Europe struggling to build up the gas reserves it needs to survive a fraught winter. EU countries have been directed to fill their gas reserves to a minimum of 80% but they are well short of that.

India's Presence

The G7 is an informal forum bringing together the leaders of the world’s leading industrial nations – the U.S., the U.K., Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan. It was formed in 1975, as the world suffered from the first oil shock and financial crisis. Canada joined in 1976 and Russia in 1998. Following the annexation of Crimea, Russia was suspended in March 2014.

Apart from India, other nations which got invited to the current summit were Argentina, Indonesia, Senegal, and South Africa.

At the summit, referring to the Ukraine war, which has pushed up energy prices across the globe, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that “energy access should not be the privilege of only the rich. A poor family also has the same rights on energy. And today, when energy costs are sky-high due to geopolitical tensions, it is more important to remember this.” Obviously, it was a dig at the West, and he was justifying India's decision not to denounce Russia, and to buy discounted oil from Russia.

Modi has frustrated the West, also by imposing a ban on wheat exports. India will continue to buy oil from Russia, possibly with the Chinese Yuan as the reserve currency, in future. India’s top cement maker UltraTech did pay for Russian coal in Yuan, in June, for the first time, in history.

A Weak Summit

The summit was weakened by the fact that only 90 minutes were set aside to discuss food,  climate and health. Discussion of debt or the injection of new Special Drawing Rights funds, two cardinal issues of Africa, were ignored. A weariness exists in Africa about the G7’s failure to deliver on pledges made in G7 communiques. In 2015, G7 leaders pledged “to lift 500 million people in developing countries out of hunger and malnutrition by 2030”. But according to Oxfam, “In 2015, there were 630 million in hunger. As of 2021, this figure is thought to be 950 million.”

None of the visiting leaders was enthusiastic about the Ukraine war. The President of Senegal, Macky Sall, as chair of the Africa Union, has warned that the poorest countries are “caught between the hammer of war and the anvil of sanctions”.

Alberto Angel Fernández, the President of Argentina, the world’s sixth-largest wheat exporter facing 60% inflation, has increased levies on food exports. 

The Fissures Within

Embittered by the food crisis, fissures have developed in the G7 camp. The vexatious parleys on reaching an agreement on safe passage for grain convoys, overseen by Turkey and the U.N., have lasted a month, and some countries are on the brink of penury.

The plan to ban imports of Russian gold trailed by the US and the U.K. does not yet have the full support of the EU.

The G7 fears the BRICS willingness to expand, and hence the G7 is unlikely to create a vacuum for China to fill by boycotting the upcoming November meeting of the G20.

Those who attended the G7 summit and the subsequent 2022 NATO summit in Spain tried to present a gait of bonhomie, though they are facing internal squabbles. Though officials from Germany and Britain were reported to push for temporary waivers on biofuels mandates to mitigate soaring food prices, Germany had to drop the idea during the summit due to resistance from the U. S. and Canada.

There is also a dispute over climate actions. A communique, released in May, said the G7 agreed to achieve "predominantly decarbonized electricity sectors" by 2035. However, the ministers failed to set a date for phasing out coal-powered energy due to objections from the U.S. and Japan. They continue to clash on coal.

The squabbles won't end in Madrid for NATO, as Turkey's concerns have added hindrance to Finland's and Sweden's pursuit of NATO membership.

False Narrative

Showcasing the PGII, the G7 blamed China for pushing the developing countries into a debt trap, through BRI. Hitting back, China has asserted that the days when global decisions were dictated by a "small group" of countries are long gone. 

The Chinese foreign ministry has clarified that calling the BRI a debt trap is a false narrative. According to the World Bank forecast, if all BRI transport infrastructure projects are carried out, by 2030, the BRI will generate $1.6 trillion of revenues for the world each year, or 1.3% of global GDP. Up to 90% of the revenues will go to partner countries. The BRI could contribute to lifting 7.6 million people from extreme poverty and 32 million from moderate poverty from 2015 to 2030. 

The competition between China G7  will enable some developing countries to have more choices. But if the crude U.S. political agenda forces these countries to take sides, they will be in a quandary. Herding all developing countries into a US-led global economic order is a weird illusion.

HERDING DEVELOPING NATIONS INTO US-LED ORDER

It is just an illusion

The G7 Summit was concluded last week. It didn't reach a consensus because of the autocratic stance of the US on various policies. The outcome was not very positive, as it is challenged by internal disagreements over trade and climate policies. The G7 discussions focused on reducing Europe's dependence on Russian energy and finding other ways to increase the economic pain for Moscow; the group is considering imposing a price cap on Russian oil. Additionally, the bloc faces a looming global food crisis springing from the Russia-Ukraine tensions, which have resulted in shortages of wheat and other crops. The G7 countries failed to reach a consensus on these issues. External dynamics have also chipped away at the G7's global influence.

India was also invited to participate in the G7 Summit. At the summit, referring to the Ukraine crisis, which has pushed up energy prices across the globe, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said that "energy access should not be the privilege of the rich only - a poor family also has the same rights on energy. And today when energy costs are sky-high due to geopolitical tensions, it is more important to remember this thing."

Obviously, it was a dig at the West, and he was justifying India's decision to buy discounted oil from Russia. India will continue to buy oil. India may buy Russian oil in future with the Chinese yuan as the reference currency, strengthening the BRICS cooperation once again. The G7 countries fear the BRICS' willingness to expand.

Those who attended the G7 summit and the subsequent 2022 NATO summit in Spain tried to present a gait of bonhomie, but they are facing internal squabbles.

China was targeted both by the G7 and NATO summits as a systemic rival. The powers behind both the summits are wary of China's ascendance as a global economic power. They are also worried about China's clout with developing countries. The reason why the G7 Summit has targeted so much China is regarded as an effort to wean away the developing world from China. There is a US lobby that wants India to be a partner of NATO, the so-called Asia-Pacific NATO.

The G7 Summit also devised a $600 billion infrastructure plan as a counter to the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It is called the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII) and is a re-launch of an unclear B3W scheme unveiled at last year's G7 meeting. The background of PGII is suspicious. It was mooted in 2021 in uncertain terms, without clarity on funds. Now it has been re-launched saying there will be private participation. But again, the summit has not been transparent on who are the private investors, raising suspicion about the US corporate intervention. In contrast, the BRI emphasizes transparency.

The G7 fund will focus on climate initiatives, among other projects, including a $2 billion solar farm investment in Angola, $320 million for hospital construction in Cote d'Ivoire, a vaccine manufacturing facility in Senegal, a 1,690 kilometres submarine telecommunications cable connecting Singapore to France via Egypt and the Horn of Africa, and $40 million to promote regional energy trade in Southeast Asia.

If the crude US political agenda forces these developing countries to take sides, they will be in a quandary. Herding all developing countries into a US-led global economic order is a weird illusion.

This commentary of mine was published in the Global Times: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202207/1269894.shtml

BRICS AND THE CHALLENGE TO WESTERN DOMINANCE

BRICS Summit and after

The 14th BRICS summit was hosted virtually by China amidst the turbulence in the international order, heightened by Russia’s presence in Ukraine and the hardening of Western positions, leading to the making of competitive plurilateral fora. This was the first BRICS summit after the Ukraine crisis and the Russian President Vladimir Putin was back on the world stage.

The summit covered intra-BRICS cooperation in areas such as counter-terrorism, trade, health, traditional medicine, environment, science and technology innovation, agriculture, technical/vocational education and training. This year’s agenda covered a range of topics, but the emphasis was given to renewing multilateralism for global economic recovery, deepening coordination on climate action, and strengthening coordination on pandemics and public health.

Chinese President Xi Jinping criticised the abuse of international sanctions, while Putin scolded the West for fomenting the global crisis. Xi exhorted the member countries to abandon the Cold War mentality, block confrontation and oppose unilateral sanctions and the abuse of sanctions. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi weighed in on the global post-pandemic recovery. 

My article

The summit was preceded by a virtual meeting of BRICS Plus foreign ministers on May 20 in which the ministers of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) were joined by representatives from Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, and Thailand. These invitees could be called the future members of the BRICS.

Established in 2006, BRICS graduated to a summit in 2009. Since India, Brazil, and South Africa (IBSA) summits were held alongside, South Africa became a logical member of BRICS in 2011. 

At the time when BRICS was formed, its member countries were generally excluded from global economic institutions, especially Western. Right from its first communiqué, BRICS made it clear that existing international institutions were flawed, and it would offer its members a forum for leadership, cooperation, and information-sharing that had been denied to them.

Moves for expansion

China and Russia consider this an appropriate time to expand BRICS and challenge the domain of the G7 by including members from the G20. Any effort to disrupt the G20 may not bear fruits with Indonesia holding firm on inviting Russia.

China, backed by Russia, is hastening the process of expansion of BRICS as part of its strategic challenge to the US-led international order and to collect moderate powers around them. Hence, the 2022 theme,  “Foster High-quality BRICS Partnership, Usher in a New Era for Global Development” was not accidental.

The setting up of the New Development Bank or BRICS Bank was the first step in the expansion of BRICS. 

Despite Western foreboding, BRICS implemented its 2012 decision at the Delhi summit to form new financial institutions, establishing the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in 2014. The NDB is the first bank founded by developing countries. It has established partnerships with other development banks, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the World Bank. It is trying to be more attractive to developing countries than Western banks. It lends in local currency, which protects the borrowing country from the stronger US dollar, and allows borrowing countries to set the standards for environmental and social compliance rather than having such standards imposed on them. The CRA, with a capital of more than $100 billion, is meant to help members withstand any short-term balance-of-payment pressures.

The NDB expanded membership in 2021, admitting Bangladesh, the UAE, Uruguay and Egypt. So far, the Bank has disbursed $30 billion in 80 projects in its member countries.  Of these projects, 21 are in India in sectors from transport, water and sanitation to clean energy, as well as digital and social infrastructure, involving $7.1 billion. The NDB has established an Indian Regional Office and just two days before the summit, DJ Pandian was appointed as director-general of the new office. Pandian previously served as Vice President and Chief Investment Officer at Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank.

In late May, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said that Saudi Arabia and Argentina are deeply interested in joining BRICS. The Ukraine crisis saw fissures emerging in the G20 and adding new members to BRICS could make it an alternative minus the US and its allies. This could also mean the BRICS overtaking G7 earlier than expected.

The first likely criteria in admitting new members will be to give priority to G20 members. Argentina, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia would qualify from there. For UAE and Egypt, their NDB membership is a qualifier. Kazakhstan was invited to the May 20 meeting as the largest country in Central Asia. Nigeria is an important African economy. Senegal is the current chair of the African Union. Thailand is the chair of the APEC and Indonesia, is the chair of the G20.

From the bloc of Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey and Australia (MIKTA), only Indonesia was invited. Russia and China would be happy to have Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Argentina, but Egypt is a close ally of the US. Brazil would have to agree on Argentina. They are rivals in Latin America. South Africa has views on Nigeria and Egypt.

India is unlikely to oppose Indonesia as its relationship has been improving politically. India has an enhanced bonhomie with the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Russia and China will have to decide on Kazakhstan and other Central Asian countries. China may also back Iran and Malaysia. 

Indian position

India has shown great realism by refusing to denounce Putin over Ukraine because it knows on which side the oil tanker is anchored. Indian economy is not robust and New Delhi will remain engaged with China.

The five BRICS nations together represent 40 per cent of the global population, 24 per cent of  GDP and 16 per cent of global trade. China is the largest economy in the grouping, accounting for more than 70 per cent of the group's collective $ 27.5 trillion economic might. Buffeted by the pandemic, none of the BRICS economies is predicted to expand except for China’s. Thus, India cannot afford to stay out.

India's economy is suffering as it comes off the COVID-19 coupled with Ukraine aftershocks. It cannot jeopardise the lives of its population by refusing to buy discounted Russian oil and other energy products, that have been shunned by European countries following the sanctions. Moreover, Russian companies are accepting payments in Indian rupees and UAE dirhams. China is the largest importer of Russian energy and India is the largest importer of Russian defence equipment. While the Ukraine crisis has seen US allies reduce their Russian imports, China and India have increased theirs.

Predictably, the Indian Ambassador to China Pradeep Kumar Rawat met Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi a day ahead of the summit. This was Rawat’s first meeting with Wang after he took charge as India’s new envoy to Beijing in March. A Chinese Foreign Ministry statement quoted Wang as saying that China and India’s common interests far outweigh their differences, adding that the two sides should support rather than undermine each other, strengthen cooperation rather than guard against each other, and enhance mutual trust than be suspicious of each other. Wang had visited India in March during which he held talks with External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.

Challenges ahead

The summit would be interpreted by the West as the BRICS  endorsement of Putin's doctrine. They have been unhappy with all BRICS members resisting the US-led campaign to denounce Russia and slap sanctions. China’s and India’s insistence on independence from the US-led order jells well with Russia’s anti-US stance.

BRICS continues to remain beneficial to its member states. Each country’s top leader attends the summit every year, and before G-20 summits and IMF and World Bank meetings, BRICS members hold preparatory sessions to discuss their stance.

BRICS helps China as a kind of diplomatic counteroffensive to both the revival of NATO and the increase in Indo-Pacific camouflages that are designed to keep its power in check. Through BRICS, China continues to draw on its tradition of ‘always siding with the third world,’ as Deng Xiaoping famously said.

US President Joe Biden’s signature economic initiative unveiled last month in Tokyo showed western sponsored states consciously diversifying their supply chains away from China and forming new standards-setting agreements such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, or creating setups that are trading mutually to ensure safe and reliable flows of energy-critical material, minerals, and rare earth components.

But the challenge for Beijing is that there is a growing number of alternatives for the developing countries, whether it is the free and open Indo-Pacific Vision with emphasis on infrastructure connectivity, standard-setting, healthy infrastructure, tools for good governance, or alternative financings, such as Japan-led and EU-led infrastructure connectivity projects. China can surpass this competition by being more transparent about its agreements along the Belt and Road Initiative and through the Asian Development Bank.

To cap it all, China has surpassed the US to become the richest nation in the world as global wealth tripled over the past two decades, according to a  November 2021 report by the research arm of consultants McKinsey & Co. China’s wealth jumped to $120 trillion in 2020 from just $7 trillion in 2000. This marks a jump of $113 trillion in 20 years, helping the nation surpass the US in terms of net worth. During the same period, the US saw its net worth more than double to $90 trillion. However, the nation could not beat China due to muted increases in property prices.

Thus the broader geopolitics guarantees the flourishing of BRICS. India does not want to openly ally with the US against China, though the US has surpassed China to become India’s biggest trading partner. Russia is the trusted comrade of both India and  China. Brazil and South Africa have little to gain by turning away from BRICS.

The US strategy in containing China has focused on security, whether through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, NATO, or the AUKUS deal. But China is focused on an economic game through infrastructure, investment, and building close networks in many developing countries.

Hence it is not easy for the US to lead the liberal international order and check China’s quantum jump. The global order is no more a monolithic entity; it comprises several blocs of power that jockey for influence. This is the clear message of the BRICS summit.

(This article was published in China India Dialogue http://chinaindiadialogue.com/message-of-the-brics-summit-2)

© Ramachandran 

BAPTISM RECORD OF JACOB RAMAVARMA FOUND

A valid record still preserved

The baptism record of Jacob Ramavarma, the first Christian convert from the Cochin royal family has been unearthed by a research scholar of the Central University, Kasaragod, at the St Francis Church, Fort Kochi. This record has been mentioned in my debut novel, Papasnanam, published in 2017, which is based on the life and travails of Jacob Ramavarma. The novel says (Page 112) that the baptism register no 4 of the Church records the baptism of Ramavarma as no 112. It was preceded by the baptism of a Konkani Brahmin, Ananthan.

Baptism register

I had been to the Church and had met the vicar of the church. He had told me that he will get me the register a couple of days later, for me to take the photograph. I could not do it then because, by that time I had withdrawn the novel from Kalakaumudi, which had offered to serialise it- S Ramesan, the poet gave me an alternate offer of publishing the novel by SPCS, to which I had agreed.

The novel was published and I had left it there. Last month, a research scholar, Ammu Venunath called me for an interview. Her PhD thesis is going to be on Microhistory in Malayalam Novels, she said. It was a pleasant surprise to hear that one of the novels she has taken up for her research is, Papasnanam. M K Sanoo and I had spoken about the novel once at the C M S College, Kottayam. 

Ammu came and interviewed me twice after Vishu, during which I explained the background of the protagonist and the history of conversion in Kerala and India. She had no idea whether Ramavarma was a true or fictional character. It was then I told her of the existence of the baptism record. She went to the Church the next day and met the vicar. He kept the record ready for her after a couple of days. She clicked the record and sent me the photos today.

The record mentions the name, Constantine Ramavarma in the fourth line and in the next line, it says that his father was the late king of Cochin Wirakeralan. Jacob Ramavarma was known as Constantine after baptism and became Jacob during his priesthood.

Baptism record

The baptism register that Ammu found belongs to 1830-1942. Ramavarma was baptised by the protestant missionary, Samuel Ridsdale, on April 5, 1835. It was a Sunday. Ramavarma was 19 and Ananthan, who was baptised as John (John Ananthan) was 25. John committed suicide later, and Ramavarma died of smallpox while living at Thalassery, with Herman Gundert, a missionary and grandpa of the reputed German writer, Herman Hesse, who wrote the novel, Siddartha.

Yacob (Jacob) Rama Varman was the second of the eight children of King Vira Kerala Varma (period of reign:1809-1828), popularly known as Virulam Thampuran or Karkadakathil Theepetta Thampuran. The second name refers to his death in the Malayalam month of Karkadakam.

It was a period of great political turmoil. Just before Vira Kerala Varma took over, Paliath Govindan Achan, the Commander of the King had rebelled against the British. He was exiled first to Madras and then to Bombay. He died in 1832. After the rebellion, the military was deployed in Mattancherry, Alapuzha and Tripunithura, till 1809. When Ramavarman was born (1814) Fort Cochin was handed over to the British.

We get much of the information on Ramavarman from his speech which is considered the first autobiography in Malayalam by some. It is the story of his conversion. It was first published in the journal, Keralopakari in 1874 and was published as a book by Basel Mission Press in Tellicherry, the same year. It was written for a public reading in the hastharpanam (anointing by placing the right hand over the head) ceremony on September 3,1856 when he was anointed a priest, in the presence of Chirakkal King and Herman Gundert. It was read after the sermon by Rev Samuel Hebich, before the anointment. Yakob had been living with Gundert, since 1849.

A detailed post on Jacob Ramavarma:

https://hamletram.blogspot.com/2014/02/prince-ramavarama-becomes-jacob.html

© Ramachandran