For decades since the 1990s, the malicious attacks on India’s first and longest serving Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru by the right-wing elements such as BJP have been condoned and encouraged. While those attacks continue today, there has also been a resurgence of Nehru which shows signs of reversal of the trend. However, the threat to Nehru’s legacy is not only from his political enemies but from a group of self-proclaimed scholars and historians. This group of people pretend sympathy towards Nehru and take advantage of Nehru’s supposed misery to further their own agenda. The malice of attacks on Nehru by his sworn enemies is easier to see while the mischief by those who patronize him needs careful look.
In the days leading up to Nehru’s 130th birth anniversary, self-proclaimed historian Ramachandra Guha had generously recommended a book to which he wrote the Foreword. Guha claimed this book to be “unbiased” and the author Walter Crocker to be a scholar. The irony is that, within 11 minutes of this recommendation, Guha tweeted that “unbiased” appreciation of Nehru cannot happen until all of Nehru-Gandhi dynasty exit politics. Is Guha confused? Or is he speaking from both sides of his mouth? Or is he just trying to sell a book?
Nehru Held Hostage
Whatever may be his compulsions, Guha’s apparent agenda is to remove Nehru-Gandhi dynasty from Indian politics. Guha seemingly believes that he can accomplish this goal by holding Nehru a hostage. This attempt by Guha is futile at best since the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty does not depended on Nehru for their votes. In this exercise, Guha reminds me of the well-known fictional (The Godfather) character Michael Corleone who holds Vincenzo Pentangeli a hostage, enforcing a favorable behavior on his brother Frank Pentangeli. Guha is thus fancying himself as a mobster historian!
Frustration of the West
I happen to have read this book (Nehru: A Contemporary’s Estimate) which was recommended by Guha. While Crocker or Guha have right to their opinions, this book cannot be called “unbiased”. In fairness to Crocker, I do not expect any biography to be unbiased. If someone bothered to write a book on anybody, he/she already has strong feelings for that person, be it positive or negative. Contemporary Indians need to understand the Cold War milieu of 1950s and 1960s before believing any western perspective of Nehru or VK Krishna Menon. Australia, a member of ANZUS was head-deep in Cold War during Nehru’s time.
Crocker, the Australian High Commissioner, was a personification of that Capitalist-Communist dichotomy. To him, the purpose of Indians (and probably any other third-world nation) should be to fight Communists, be it Soviets or Chinese. Thus, Crocker’s frustration with Nehru who kept India away from this politics, should not be surprising. Crocker would be happy if Nehru handed India back to western armies and capitalists like Pakistan did. Crocker would probably be thrilled if Nehru turned Indians into religious fanatics and sent them on a holy war against godless Communists.
Walter Crocker, like many in the west, despised Krishna Menon who chartered a separate path of Non-Alignment for not just India but two-thirds of the world. Crocker did not approve Nehru’s Socialism, nor did he appreciate Nehru’s role in improving the lives of Indians. According to capitalist philosophy, that is the job of the capitalist! The plight of ordinary Indians under centuries of feudal and colonial rule was not Crocker’s concern.
Crocker was disappointed that Nehru would not handover Kashmir to Pakistan which could supposedly motivate Pakistan join hands with India and fight the Chinses Communists, while India could help Pakistan fight the Soviets. His arguments on issues like Plebiscite are misleading at best. Crocker wondered why Nehru could not see the big picture and clung on to Kashmir. Crocker went to great lengths to demonize Nehru and Krishna Menon for expelling NATO Member Portugal from Goa. Goa, Crocker argued, is even smaller than Kashmir and hence Nehru should have left it to Portugal!
What would be a good, unbiased book to read about Nehru?
One cannot expect any biographer to be unbiased. Fortunately, in case Nehru, we do not have to understand him through the eyes of someone else. Nehru wrote extensively about himself, his family, Congress, India, world, politics, poverty and freedom. From his rising years of 1930s to matured statesman days of 1940s, he wrote two books: An Autobiography and Discovery of India. After he became the Prime Minister, he wrote fortnightly letters to the (then mostly Congress) Chief Ministers. Whether you want to know his outlook, psychology, moral and social values or specific policies, you can find them in these books and letters which are strikingly honest. You can read for yourself and form your own unbiased opinion on Nehru. Those that read his other book, Glimpses of World History, can see through the claims of Nehru’s ignorance of world affairs, whether it was China, USSR or USA.
Sri Kancha Ilaiah, a scholar and social reformer, had recently written of his own Discovery of Nehru through Nehru’s books. I hope that Sri Ilaiah’s article inspires a generation of Indians!