THE
TRIPLE STREAM
K. Ramakotiswara
Rau
……he that laboureth right for
love of Me
Shall finally attain! But, if in
this
Thy faint heart fails, bring Me
thy failure!
THE SONG CELESTIAL
So, the last link has been snapped. Ireland–the youngest
of the Republics–will no longer owe allegiance to the King of England. The
‘Curse of Cromwell’ has been wiped out. The Parnells and the Redmonds, and,
with them, the Morleys and the Gladstones of Anglo-Irish history will fall into
their proper places as the redeemers of the honour of their respective
countries. Ever so, the Naorojis, the Tilaks and the Nehrus on the one side,
and the Wedderburns, Montagus and Mountbattens on the other, in Indo-Anglian
history. The ancient lands of the Druids and the Rishis–how long have they
taken to come into their own! That India too will be a Republic–sovereign,
independent, democratic–is beyond question. That the same formula will be
devised to cover both Eire and India for securing the friendliest of relations with
the Commonwealth without actual membership of it, is also an immediate
possibility. Almost simultaneous statements have been made in Dublin, London,
and Delhi, emphasising the new status of Eire, and, by implication, pointing to
the new status of India.
The King of England will continue to be King of Northern
Ireland. The Premier of that Dominion is positive that Eire’s severance of
the British connection shuts out all chance of Ireland ever becoming re-united.
But this is not the view taken by Mr. Costello. That Ireland is one and
indivisible, and that, sooner or later, the partition must be reversed is an
abiding faith with all Irish Nationalists. The partition was the price which
they paid for the liberation of Eire. Now that Eire is utterly free, Northern
Ireland is welcome to share that freedom. Some kind of cordial association with
the Commonwealth will always be there. Even citizenship of Commonwealth
countries on a reciprocal basis is visualised by Mr. Attle and the Premiers of
other Dominions. The citizens of Eire will not be ‘foreigners’: they will be
closer to the Dominions than Frenchmen of Russians. Northern Ireland need not
make a parade of her loyalty to the Crown; she need not set her face against a
United Ireland merely on the ground that the citizens of Eire are no longer
subjects of the King. From the days of the settlement of Ulster to those of the
Black and Tans, the centuries are crowded with events which dwell in men’s
memories; and the memories are not pleasant. The process of healing has now
commenced. Mr. Costello’s references to King George are charged with affection
and solicitude. May cordiality grow between two ancient nations, politically
sundered but drawn together by social and economic bonds.
The Kashmir Commission has submitted an interim
report to the Security Council, and the latter has once again expressed the
hope that Indian and Pakistan would get together and hammer out an agreement.
Definite proposals seem to have been made regarding the conditions under which
a plebiscite should be held. Pakistan, which took the offensive by abetting the
raiders and organising the military operations in Kashmir, now pleads that she
is on the defensive. India is the aggressor, and India must be told by the Security
Council to stop the fighting! But then, the world knows that it was Pakistan
which refused to accept the ‘cease-fire’ proposal of the Commission. When
confronted with this truth, Zafrullah Khan urged that the proposal was not
acceptable because it was not coupled with a plebiscite on Pakistan’s own
terms. These terms apparently are the supersession of Sheik Abdullah’s
Government and the stationing of Pakistan troops in Kashmir at the time of the
plebiscite. Now, what is Pakistan’s ‘locus standi’ in respect of any plebiscite
in Kashmir? Pakistan helped to plunder and ravage the vale of Kashmir. It
sneaked in under cover of the raiders. When Kashmir acceded to India, Kashmir
became Indian soil, and the Government of India’s prime concern was to rid the land
of all hostiles. A plebiscite has always been kept in view, but that concerns
Kashmir, India, and the United Nations. Neutral observers on behalf of the
U.N.O. can satisfy themselves that the plebiscite is a fair one. But Pakistan
has nothing to do with it. A burglar can lay no claim to supervise the meeting
of a family council. An arbitrator may be present, but Pakistan is by no means
that arbitrator.
The problem of Kashmir must be settled quickly, by
peaceful means if possible and militarily if inevitable. As Sardar Patel put
it, India cannot desert Kashmir. Pakistan can no longer play the role of
guardian of the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir.
At Santiniketan are now gathered young artists from
all over India to undergo further training under India’s master-artist, Sri
Nandalal Bose. The Education Department of the Government of India envisage a
scheme for distributing these artists between different art schools; they plan
to start fresh schools too. The Provincial Governments are co-operating in the
venture and several of the artists are their stipendiaries.
All this fills one with hope for the future of
Indian art. Vast schemes of industrialisation and of ‘stepping up’ production
are being talked of. The rage is for science and industry and for technical
equipment. In colleges and universities one finds the Humanities sinking into
oblivion. It is the less brilliant, the less ambitious who are not out for
‘great’ careers, that are supposed to be fit material for the classes in history,
philosophy, or literature. Music, painting, and sculpture are, of course,
infinitely more ‘useless’ than even philosophy or history. This tendency to
underrate the things of the mind and the spirit must be checked. It is
therefore matter for rejoicing that a new generation of artists will carry on
the artistic traditions of Ajanta and Ellora, and draw inspiration from
art-movements of the modern age.
A group of young intellectuals of Masulipatam–our city is full of intellectuals–has organised a Thinkers’ Forum, and under its auspices an Andhra Province Week is being celebrated. The opening day, November 28, was marked by two notable pronouncements. Sir S. V. Ramamurthy, the distinguished scholar and administrator, held that “on merits, there is a strong case for the formation of an Andhra Province.” He drew a significant distinction between ‘separation for the sake of ‘separation’ and ‘separation for amalgamation’. Pakistan belonged to the former category:
“It is, I think, a short-sighted view based on
incomplete understanding to condemn the linguistic Province as an instance of
the same kind of separation as the formation, say, of Pakistan. It must,
however, be realised that the way to separation for amalgamation should be
peaceful and achieved by consent, negotiation, or arbitration….The method of
achieving the linguistic Province is important next only to the objective.”
Desabhakta Sri Konda Venkatappayya, the Grand Old
Man of Andhra and one of the originators of the linguistic Provinces movement
over thirty years ago, made a comprehensive survey of the agitation for
linguistic Provinces in general and for an Andhra Province in particular. He
declared his emphatic dissent from Dr. Ambedkar in regard to the adoption of
Hindi as the language of administration in the Provinces, for that would defeat
the very purpose of linguistic division, and cut at the root of the democratic
principle that the common man in each provincial unit should be enabled to take
an intelligent share in the provincial administration. The Desabhakta was even
more severe in his condemnation of Sri K. M. Munshi’s prejudiced view which
ranked ‘linguism’ with Fascism and Racialism. It is heartening to find a
revered leader and close associate of Gandhiji re-affirming his faith in
linguistic Provinces.1 Wisdom lies in implementing a scheme accepted
years ago by the Congress as feasible and beneficent.
Close on these utterances comes another from Sri
Mavlankar, Speaker of the Indian Parliament, pleading that–
“there must be an unequivocal statement by the
persons concerned that the provincial boundaries would be settled on linguistic
lines. Linguistic Provinces could also be incorporated in the proposed Draft
Constitution. By trying to postpone the issue, bitterness among the population
of multi-lingual Provinces would be enhanced and progress might be hampered.”
The Linguistic Provinces Commission, whose report
is due on the 15th of this month, ought to pay special attention to these
pronouncements.
1 The full text of the speech is reproduced in this number of Triveni, by courtesy of the Thinkers’ Forum.