Bertrand Russell and India
It was a siege of sorts. We were tucked away in our hostel
rooms due to a ruckus between the locals and the students and for a week or so,
we were stuck in our hostel, with no classes. It all started with somebody assaulting
somebody and many other bodies joining the fracas, like most thallu
cases. The college ground to a halt, doors were boarded, and the Regional
Engineering College at Calicut was shut down for a while. But naturally, we had
to find ways of making merry in these newfound holidays. I possessed a cassette
tape recorder, a great novelty in those days! I had convinced my friend the
late IM Sankaranarayanan to part with two of his precious Mohammed Rafi LP
records for a few hours, so that I could copy a selection to a cassette
tape. The copying was done with during
this holiday and the cassette was played back and forth, for hours. One song
stood out - ‘Aaj ki Raat yeh kaisi raat’ – a melodious and romantic number.
But my friends, this is not really about my college life
(which without doubt, was colorful), but about the film in which that song was
included, and some trivia around it. The song itself, sung by Mohammed Rafi,
tuned by Shankar Jaikishan, including some crooning by Saira Banu, was made for
a film called Aman. Sara Banu tells us in a 2017 interview - "It was an
important film that we shot in Japan. And I did sing, and that too with the one
and only Mohd. Rafi saab. I always wanted to sing but was too shy. My
grandmother Shamshad Begum was an accomplished classical singer and I’d urge
her to teach me. She would demand that I practice, which I never did. But
finally, it happened in Kumar saab’s Aman."
And thus, we get to the topic of the day. It is about the
film Aman (Peace) – a landmark film from 1967 with an important message, made
by Mohan Kumar. It had Rajendra Kumar and Saira Banu in the lead. In a crowd
scene, a young Naseeruddin Shah made his first film appearance (paid Rs 7 ½/- for
he was picked up at a 50% discount, since unionized extras were paid Rs 15/-)
as an ‘extra’, and Jagjit Singh (the late and great Ghazal singer), did a
cameo, as a Sikh with a turban and beard.
The storyline is incredible, considering the potboilers of
today and I saw it recently thanks to Youtube. It is about a British educated
Dr Gautam Das (Rajendra Kumar) whose mother had been killed in Rangoon by a Japanese bombing. After studies, he decides to volunteer and work in war-torn
Japan following the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Das wants to find a cure
for radiation sickness and in Japan, he meets Meloda (Saira Banu) a Japanese
girl, born and brought up in India. Their love story takes up a portion of the film
when the above song is sung and as the movie moves on, Das imperils his own
life to rescue fishermen at the French atoll where, yet another nuclear test is
carried out. Following the rescue, he is afflicted by radiation disease and
succumbs to it. His body is ceremoniously brought to Delhi and millions arrive
to pay their respects.
The decently made color film failed to do well, but what is
fascinating about the movie is that Das, in the movie, meets and seeks the
blessings of Lord Bertrand Russell before setting out to Japan, and that
was the one and only appearance of the renowned British philosopher, pacifist,
and Nobel Peace laureate, in a film!
Before we get to the heavy lifting of why Russell did all
this, let us see what Rajendra Kumar had to say in his biography - During a
brainstorming session involving the film’s creatives, Rajendra Kumar had come
up with a suggestion. ‘Mohan,’ he said to the director, ‘let’s try and get
Bertrand Russell in the opening scene.’
The other man laughed at the very idea. ‘You’re joking,
right?’ he said. ‘Lord Russell is one of the greatest philosophers of our time
and a famous member of Britain’s anti-war brigade. Look at his stature and look
at us – just ordinary film-industry people! How could we even dream of bridging
the divide?’
‘True!’ Rajendra admitted. ‘But he advocates nuclear
disarmament. Our film Aman conveys the same message. No harm in asking him, is
there?’ So, the next day, the two men composed a letter and mailed it to Lord Russell.
To their surprise, they received a reply from the philosopher’s secretary ten
days later. ‘Lord Russell,’ said the letter, ‘has agreed to appear in the
film’s opening scene. However, because of his age, he is unable to travel to
India. If you could be so kind as to come and meet him here, he will be glad to
give you an hour of his time.
Elated by the news, Mohan Kumar, Rajendra Kumar, and
their crew left for England without delay and made their way to Porthmadog,
earlier known as Port Madoc, the small coastal town in North Wales where
Bertrand Russell lived. The ailing Lord Russell received the Indian film star
with great warmth and respect and so enjoyed the meeting and the shoot that he
worked on the scene for all of four hours, instead of the allotted one hour.
The Russell scene in the movie is not done very well if you ask me, with the voice-over spoiling it all, as Kumar stumbles through his dialog and the 94-year-old dazed-looking Russell mumbles his reply. Russell replying to Rajendra Kumar says the following - ‘my well wishes are with you. This problem is the problem of the whole world and I hope that you will be successful in this endeavor. I respect your views. Your work is of great importance, and I hope that all the countries of the world would appreciate your work.’”
People in Japan and the Middle East were awed by the film,
but it was a dud in India, landing with a thud. Kumar explains – “Aman
released in May 1967. It was a very good film, but it didn’t run. For the
Indian audience, the film was far ahead of its time. It enjoyed success mostly
in Iran, Lebanon, Egypt and so on. It was such an honor for us to have Lord
Bertrand Russell in our film, but the funny part was that the Indian audience
neither knew who he was nor understood the value of his message and appearance.
They thought, ‘Pata nahin kaunsa buddha - kahan se pakad layein hai? Who knows
where they picked up some old man and brought him here.’
Kumar says - The climax of the film was shot in Delhi. It
was a funeral-procession scene, an arthi scene for which we had placed a small
advertisement in the newspaper, stating that fans who wanted to witness and be
a part of the scene should come to India Gate with flowers. Next day, millions
of people arrived, showering the arthi with flowers, while the song ‘Aman ka
farishta’ (Angel of Peace) played in the background. Halla ho gaya! Pandemonium
reigned. Even Madam [Indira] Gandhi couldn’t pass through because of the
surging crowds. She asked, ‘What’s happening?’ A film shoot, she was told. From
that day on, she banned shooting on Rajpath. When the film released, people
thought [deceased Prime Minister Lal Bahadur] Shastriji ki arthi ka stock shot
tha, but it wasn’t.”
In the end it was just another film, which bit the dust…
But what is Bertrand Russell’s connection to India and why
did he decide to get involved? Therein lies a fascinating tale. Considering
that his book mentioning Nehru and the Sino – India war of 1962 is still banned
in India, his involvement takes even more significance. That is what the next
part of this study is all about, something most Indians know little about.
As Julie Andrews sang, ‘let’s start at the very
beginning, a very good place to start’…
Krishna Menon, India league, and Russell
So btw, who is Bertrand Russell - Bertrand Arthur William Russell
(18 May 1872 – 2 February 1970) was a British mathematician, philosopher,
logician, and public intellectual. Russell was a pacifist who championed
anti-imperialism and chaired the India League, as well as a celebrated
twentieth century mathematician. He is not only known for his work in the field
of mathematics but also as a social critic, historian, author, and political
activist. As a pacifist, he became an outspoken proponent of nuclear disarmament.
In 1950, Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature "in recognition
of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarian
ideals and freedom of thought".
Ray Perkins explains - Russell was Chair of the India
League in London during the 1930s and penned five letters to the Manchester
Guardian in support of Indian social reforms and was in general sympathy with
the aspirations of Gandhi’s National Congress Party. While in the US during
World War Two Russell continued to concern himself with Indian politics and
wrote five more letters to the editor during the war…
Eventually India attained independence, and Menon after a
period as the Indian HC in London, moved back to India to continue work with
Jawaharlal Nehru, who was also a good friend of Bertrand Russell, as their
correspondence testifies to. Russell was particularly supportive of India’s nonalignment
policy, though Russell remarked that, after independence, he had “felt it no
longer appropriate to meddle with Indian affairs, and my connection with them
came to an end.”
Nuclear days – Cold War period
In July 1945, the first nuclear device test was carried out
by the US and two months later, atom bombs were dropped at Nagasaki and
Hiroshima., obliterating the two cities and killing thousands. The Soviets
followed up with their tests in 1949. A race was on, and the hydrogen bomb
was developed next. Long distance bombers and missiles to deliver the warheads
came next, followed by satellites and GPS systems. Proliferation continued, and
quickly UK (1952), France (1960), and China (1964) joined the club. When the US
detected Soviet nuclear missile installations under construction in nearby Cuba
in 1962, the s%^& hit the fan, and the world was on the brink of a nuclear
war.
As the Americans and Soviets were staring down at each other
over the Cuban missile crisis, the Sino-Indian conflict erupted. This then was
the backdrop to the parlays between Nehru, Menon, and Russell.
Russell, Menon, and Nehru
While their respect for one another remained high, Menon
distanced himself from Russell after the latter suggested a
‘preventative war’ against Russia when it went nuclear in the late 40’s. Russell
insists that it was a mistaken apprehension and clarified in 1953, in a letter
to the New York Nation - I once spoke at a meeting at which only one
reporter was present and he was a Communist, though reporting for orthodox
newspapers. He seized on his opportunity, and in spite of my utmost efforts I
have never been able to undo the harm. Krishna Menon, with whom I had collaborated
for years on Indian affairs, turned against me. "The New Statesman"
in London wrote assuming the truth of the report, and it was only by visiting
the editor in company with my lawyer that I induced "The New
Statesman" to publish a long letter of refutation from me. You are at
liberty to make any use you like of this letter, and I shall be glad if you can
make its contents known to anybody who still believes the slanderous report.
Krishna Menon did not quite relent, even after Russell
approached him at the eve of Nehru’s arrival in London in 1955. For him, India
was the most important neutral state which held a key to human survival and Russell
needed Nehru to support him in his anti-nuclear initiatives. He contacted Menon
through Julie Medlock and Menon replied that he continued to hold Russell with
high regard and affection. Nevertheless, he curtly informed Russel that the
same West had killed off his suggestion to make available to the world a report
on the effects of atomic & hydrogen weapon explosions, on humans. His
attempts to have the Hydrogen bomb banned, had also been scuttled by the West, Menon
said. But in all fairness, he arranged for Russell and Nehru to meet, and the
trio met, in March 1955.
Menon went back and planned to set up a committee to explore
the effects of such modern wars, presided by Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan.
Unfortunately, after further discussions with the IAEC and other members of the
cabinet, Nehru decided not to take a public stance on the matter, though a
paper was published. A plea signed by Einstein, Russell, and many more
distinguished co-signatories was released, implicitly aimed at the only two
nuclear-weapons states of the day, the U.S., and the Soviet Union, which in 1955
seemed on the path to war.
Nehru and Russell continued hold each other in high regard. In
1960, just two years before the Cuban missile crisis and the Sino-Indian war, Russell
had written: "Nehru is known to stand for sanity and peace in this
critical moment of history. Perhaps it will be he who will lead us out of the
dark night of fear into a happier day."
Russell and the China-India War – 1962
Russel’s involvement in various international affairs in an
individual capacity had made things so difficult that he was forced to create a
foundation with personnel to spearhead and direct these efforts. Russell felt
that he, as an individual stood a better chance with negotiations during
crises, compared to egoistic and bureaucratic national organizations. A popular
name in those days, the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had agreed to
serve as a sponsor of the new Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation.
Russell said later- “Many people seem to have been amazed
that I should mediate in such matters without having any official status to do
so, but I think events show that, even in our highly organized world, there are
things that a private individual can do which are much more difficult for a
Minister or an organization. In particular, it is much easier to agree with a
powerless individual without loss of face than it is to agree with those whose
arguments are backed by H-bombs of almost infinite destructive power.”
This conflict is a full half of the theme (Cuba being the
other) of his book ‘Unarmed Victory’, a book banned in India due to the tilt in
Russell’s stance towards China. The exact role which he played, and the tightrope he and Ceylon’s Sirimavo Bandaranayake had to walk, is not very well known
in India, but it was illuminating for someone like me, who had read through
many books and accounts on the conflict and yet missed this. The full story of the two emissaries he deputed to India, Ceylon and
China, one of them perhaps the very secretary who replied to Rajendra Kumar’s
letter, is quite incredible and I will recount it in detail, another day.
Nehru explained “There is such a strong feeling in India
over the invasion by China that no Government can stand if it does not pay some
heed to it.” He adds that “a sense of national surrender and humiliation” would
result in “a very serious setback” to “all our efforts to build up the nation.”
He then points out that “the popular upsurge all over India can be utilized for
strengthening the unity and capacity for work of the nation.” The complete
letter is a document which stands out, in explaining the situation within
India, at that time.
As we all know, Nehru was facing pressures at home,
including within his own Congress party. He had to maintain balance and attain
a semblance of support from the right-wingers who were clamoring for action
against China, so also the public. In the end, no agreements were reached on
the Colombo proposals and both countries dragged their feet. Nehru felt that
negotiations with China would just have to wait. The two nations continue to exchange
diplomatic overtures, but to this day, the border issues remain unresolved.
As for Menon, he was staunchly against nuclear armament
until the end. Menon, as is well known, was
passionately against nuclear weapons, and partnered in many quests against
their proliferation. His discussions and arguments with KC Pant and Homi Bhabha
make interesting reading. Krishna Menon, who had always advocated nuclear
disarmament, was ill and in hospital when Indira Gandhi carried out the
peaceful nuclear explosion on May 18, 1974. He summoned her to his hospital bed
and voiced his disapproval of the PNE. Until the day he died, Menon continued
to fight against it, as he saw India taking steps towards nuclear programs and
seeking help to reach there.
Perhaps his simplistic view of a utopian world driven by ‘common
sense’, very unlike his usual firm grasp of world affairs, continued to cloud
his decision making, as it did when he never expected China to attack India.
I am sorry for taking you from a light college romp, through
a romantic song, and dropping you with a thud into a boiling cauldron dealing
with ‘nuclear disarmament’. But in the end, we have to be aware, that if the
powers be irresponsible, we could very well be left in a world that Nevil
Shute described beautifully, but forlornly in his apocalyptic novel ‘On the
Beach’, a dark and cold world - down under in Australia, following a
nuclear holocaust.
True, it was written in 1957, when there were only a few
studies available on the effects of a nuclear war and the book is quite
downbeat and gloomy. Scientists say that it is unnecessarily demoralizing and perpetuates
the myth that any large-scale nuclear war would inevitably wipe out all human
life. But well, it is a novel that made a point then and is still worth
reading. If you can’t find the movie starring Gregory Peck, read the book.
And see ‘Aman’ on ‘youtube’ if you are so inclined.
References
Yours Faithfully, Bertrand Russell: A Lifelong Fight for Peace, Justice, and Truth- Bertrand Russell, Ray Perkins (Jr.)
Man's Peril, 1954-55 By Bertrand Russell, Ed Andrew G Bone
Mulk Raj Anand: A Reader
Unarmed Victory – Bertrand Russell
Selected letters - Bertrand Russell
