Karan Singh's Blog

I have been distressed by the fierce controversy that has broken out in the press and electronic media with regard to Article 370, flowing from an avoidable statement by the MoS in PM’s office. The whole question is extremely sensitive and must be handled coolly and in a mature fashion. The sort of statements issued from both sides will only create further turmoil and tension in the Jammu & Kashmir State.

Let it be recalled that my father Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession in October 1947 under unusual circumstances when a full scale war was raging due to the Pakistani based tribal invasion. It is true that that Instrument was exactly the same as the document signed by all the other former provincial States. However, whereas the other States later signed merger agreements, the relationship of Jammu & Kashmir with the rest of the country was governed by a special set of circumstances, and hence given a special position. The Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir, which I signed into law in 1957, is still in force.

Certainly J&K is an ‘integral part’ of India, but that does not necessarily mean that it has to be treated exactly on par with other States. Hong Kong is an ‘integral part’ of China but has been given a special dispensation. There are in fact numerous examples around the world in which, due to special circumstances, certain areas or regions have been given a special dispensation. Though all talk of secession is totally unacceptable and uncalled for, the steam-roller approach is also not appropriate.

Let us not forget that 50 percent of the area of my father’s 84,000 sq miles State is in fact not in our possession. It has been under Pakistan control since the UN’s brokered ceasefire on 1 January 1949, and Pakistan has leased a considerable portion of this land to China. An interesting point also is that in the three regions of the State that are with us – Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh – the bulk of public opinion differs sharply on this issue.

My appeal to all concerned is to kindly tone down the rhetoric and not let the Minister’s statement plunge the new Government almost immediately into a complex and difficult situation. The whole question of Jammu & Kashmir has to be looked at in an integral fashion, including the international dimension, the constitutional position, the legal aspects as well as the political aspects. Such an integral review is overdue, but it has to be done in a cooperative rather than a confrontational manner.

Karan Singh

29.5.2014

In view of the recent burst of interest in the media, I would like to recall the association that I was privileged to have, over six decades ago, with the great Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel. In fact, had it not been for the Sardar, I would have spent the rest of my life in a wheelchair. In my youth I had developed a problem in my hip and had been confined to a wheelchair for many months. When Gandhiji visited my father in August 1947, I insisted on sitting in at the meeting and my chair was wheeled in under the chinar tree at Gulab Bhavan Palace with its magnificent view of the Dal Lake.

When towards the end of October, after the Pakistani tribal invasion, we moved to Jammu on the advice of V.P. Menon, my chair was brought down in a station wagon. In November 1947, Sardar Patel visited Jammu and came to see us. When he learnt that I had been confined to a wheelchair for six months, he told my father that I should immediately be sent to America for treatment. Since I was an only child, my mother, of course, was very reluctant for me to go abroad. But my father realised that Sardar’s wise advice needed to be followed. As a result, arrangements were made to send me to New York for medical treatment, and it was due to surgery and prolonged treatment in the United States that I was able to walk again and finally resume a normal life, including playing tennis (doubles), badminton and golf. I, therefore, owe an undying debt of gratitude to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, without whose intervention I would certainly have spent my whole life under a severe handicap.

In 1949, relations between Sheikh Abdullah and my father, Maharaja Hari Singh, had become so estranged that it was no longer possible for both of them to continue to function in the state. Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel finally took the decision to ask my father to leave the state “for a while” and appoint me as his regent, although in fact he never returned to the state. In this context, the Sardar invited us to come to Delhi, and at a meeting with my parents, broke the news to them. Sheikh Abdullah had insisted that my mother should also leave the state because she was active in helping the tens of thousand of refugees who were streaming into Jammu from the areas occupied by the Pakistani incursion, including Mirpur and almost all of the erstwhile Poonch Jagir, except the town.

This came as a severe blow to my parents, who were shocked that after acceding to India they were now being virtually exiled from the state. However, they had no option but to accept, and it was decided that my father would issue a proclamation appointing me as regent on June 20, 1949, soon after I had turned 18. Before then, while we were still in Delhi, Sardar Patel graciously invited me to spend a fortnight with him in May at the Dehra Dun circuit house. He was keeping poor health and was nursed with great affection by his daughter Maniben Patel. He would call for me from time to time, and I had the privilege of hearing his views on various matters, including, of course, Jammu and Kashmir, where he did not share Nehru’s very close and trusting relationship with Sheikh Abdullah.

Of late, Sardar Patel has come back into the political discourse. There is no question that among the amazing galaxy of leaders in his team, the Sardar and Nehru were the two closest political associates of Mahatma Gandhi. However, it is also clear that the decision to choose Nehru as the first prime minister was taken by Mahatma Gandhi himself. It was not as if it was a party decision; it was Gandhiji who, as the unquestioned leader of the freedom movement, took all the major decisions. He rightly realised that although the Sardar was senior in age and experience, he was much older and did not have the vitality, charisma and international prestige that the younger man enjoyed. Prescient as he was, he had decided well before Independence that Nehru was the one who would take over as prime minister when the British left, which was why Nehru became the head of the first interim government in coalition with the Muslim League in 1946, and remained prime minister from 1947 for 17 years until 1964, while the Sardar passed away in 1950.

The fact that Gandhiji chose Jawaharlal Nehru, first over Subhas Chandra Bose and later over Sardar Patel, in no way detracts from the stature of those two great leaders. Netaji’s heroic role in raising the Indian National Army and infusing a new revolutionary spirit into the freedom movement will always be remembered with pride. As far as the Sardar is concerned, he achieved a task the like of which had never before been attempted in world history. He succeeded in integrating over 500 Indian states and principalities into a united India with the consent and cooperation of the princes themselves, except in the cases of Hyderabad and Junagarh. The peaceful transition from feudalism to democracy laid the solid foundation of Indian unity, and this is an achievement for which the entire nation, regardless of party affiliation, will remain eternally indebted to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, rightly called the Iron Man of India.

As published in IndianExpress

A film on my vision and beliefs by filmmaker Raja Chouhury entitled “I Believe: Universal Values for a Global Society” can now be seen free online at Youtube.com and watched here as well.

‘Ship of Theseus’, ‘Bhaag Milkha Bhaag’ and ‘The Light’ offer new ways of seeing.

From Indian Express 19 Sep 2013

I am not a frequent film goer and, in fact, see most of my films during long international flights. However, recently I had occasion to see three quite remarkable films in Delhi theatres. The first was the Ship of Theseus. This is a triptych of three apparently unconnected episodes, one dealing with a blind girl who has her eyes replaced; the other with a Jain monk who, on the verge of starvation, finally agrees to a liver transplant; and the third of a kidney transplant patient and his efforts to find the donor. All three episodes are beautifully filmed and brilliantly acted by a largely unknown cast. There are some striking aerial scenic shots, including some taken in Sweden. The blind girl, who, despite her disability, had taken to photography, finds herself disoriented when her sight is restored. The Jain monk goes through terrible suffering and deprivation because he refuses to take medicine based on animal-testing. The third episode deals with the response of a kidney transplant patient to the challenges he faces. It is only in the last five minutes that we learn the connection between these three episodes.

Incidentally, the Ship of Theseus refers to an ancient Greek paradox. If all the planks of Theseus’ ship are removed and replaced with new ones, and a new ship built out of the old planks, which one would be the original Ship of Theseus? This is a thought-provoking, nuanced film, and it is good to see that such previously niche films are now getting a national and even international audience.

The second film that I saw was Bhaag Milkha Bhaag, a superb film that is more or less our version of Chariots of Fire. It presents the story of a great athlete, Milkha Singh, from his childhood to his final triumph in Pakistan. On the way, it gives us fascinating and often disturbing glimpses into the various episodes of his life, including the massacre in his village at the time of Partition, his short spell as a minor criminal, his joining the armed forces and subsequent training and, of course, his many brilliant running achievements in India and abroad. There is a fascinating interlude during which the Indian team visits Australia, including a memorable nightclub scene and a one-night fling with an attractive young Australian girl. The most amazing element is the brilliant acting of Farhan Akhtar. His performance is particularly remarkable because it seems that he trained for 18 months for this film. When he first appears, his physique is good but not extraordinary, and in the course of the film we can see his muscles growing and his entire body becoming that of a world-class athlete. He has recreated the character of Milkha Singh so realistically that Milkha himself is said to have been astonished. Although the film lasts three hours, it does not drag and, as in Ship of Theseus, the photography is excellent. The musical score is also effective, including lots of rock and country tunes from the West, which, being a rock addict myself, I particularly enjoyed.

The third film, though made on a more modest scale and panned by the critics, is also a gem. Called The Light., it is about one of my heroes, Swami Vivekananda. Beautifully portrayed by a handsome young man who looks strikingly like the Swami, it delivers the story of how, through the blessings of Sri Ramakrishna, Narendranath Dutta is finally transformed into Swami Vivekananda. The actor portraying Sri Ramakrishna is also outstanding, and the scenes between the two of them are memorable and full of spiritual resonance. Perhaps the most moving scene is in the court of the Raja of Khetri, where Vivekananda first walks out of the durbar hall in a huff where a dancing girl was performing. Then, when she sings the famous Surdas bhajan “Prabhuji mere avaguna chitt na dharo, Samdarshi hai naam teharo, chaho to paar karo (Lord, do not look upon my shortcomings because you are Samdarshi, one who looks upon good and evil, saint and sinner with an equal eye)”, hearing this, Vivekananda realises that he had acted in an unbecoming manner, and hastens back to the hall where the dancer has just finished the song. He blesses her, calls her “Mata” and asks forgiveness with folded hands for his earlier unthinking behaviour, at which point she falls at his feet sobbing uncontrollably.

The whole Chicago event has been very well recreated, including his famous first address “Sisters and Brothers of America”. His return and his passing away at the young age of 39 have also been shown, as well as his earlier travels on foot as a penniless sanyasi throughout the length and breadth of India, including the famous swim to the rock off Kanyakumari, where his massive statue now stands. The music in this film is particularly good, and whoever has sung for Vivekananda’s part has excelled.

The film reflects Vivekananda’s deep social commitment to the alleviation of poverty that pained him intensely, and his rejection of regressive social taboos.

The important point to note is that, in all these three films, there are no famous billionaire actors or actresses, no Michael Jackson-style ensemble dances now known by the generic term Bollywood dances; no gratuitous violence, except in the Partition scene, and no ridiculous episodes that are becoming increasingly common in our cinema. It is a delight after many years to have been able to see three such films in a row; the last time I recall doing so was with Dosti, Pyaasa and Bandini several decades ago.

The writer is a Rajya Sabha MP