Winds of Change

As you are aware I have just arrived from Paris where I was attending a meeting of the Executive Board of Unesco. I must say that I have come here not only with pleasure but I have come here to fulfil a most pleasant duty and to participate in a rather modest function but which I am sure has considerable historic importance. This morning we are gathered to launch the first ever published collection of our Prime Minister's speeches.

I have had the privilege of going through many of the Prime Minister's speeches and what is more, I have had the good fortune of listening to many of these speeches when they were originally made. If I may be personal for a moment, I must also say that I have had the singular privilege of having been associated with the Prime Minister for the last twenty years or so and this association has permitted me to understand and appreciate one of the finest political minds of the Third World.

It is indeed a happy coincidence that the launching of this book is taking place in London on a piece of land which happens to be Mauritian territory. Born out of the soil of sufferings of Mauritius, Prime Minister Ramgoolam came over to Britain where his mind was fashioned by British Universities and the great traditions of British polity. What is significant indeed is the fact that although Prime Minister Ramgoolam imbibed the British Political traditions of fairplay, free discussion and open debate he has never cut his roots which have sunk deep into the Mauritian way of life, diverse and multi-faceted as it is. On the contrary his training in Britain deepened his interests in the plight of the common man and strenghthened his determination to raise the Mauritian proletariat out of the depths of politically and socially marginal living.

In a way Prime Minister Ramgoolam was helping a "wind of change" in Mauritian politics, the same "wind of change" which Sir Harold Macmillan, former British Prime Minister who is happily present today, wanted the people of Southern Africa to see for themselves. The "wind of change", a phrase coined by Sir Harold Macmillan, captures the new and hopeful mood of the twentieth century and has raised the hopes of millions and millions of people in the developing world especially in those areas which are afflicted by the evils of underdevelopment. And Prime Minister Ramgoolam in his own way has seen to it that the "wind of change" has embraced the whole of Mauritius within its sweep. But there is much more than that. Prime Minister Ramgoolam has ensured that the "wind of change" did not develop into gales and gusts which are more apt to destroy than to build. He has succeeded in mastering the winds of change and in taming them; he also has harnessed the energy inherent in those winds of change and utilised them to create a new nation out of various communities who had been taught to hate each other. Prime Minister Ramgoolam has also laid the foundations of our society in such a way that we Mauritians can develop the creative faculties of our young emergent nation.

I feel that the message of Prime Minister Ramgoolam has always been that it is not enough for a people to develop and progress materially but that it must so move forward that it can develop the faculty of re-creating itself. In the main, this is what this book contains and I am hoping that future generations of Mauritians will not miss its message. This is a case where the message is so much more important than the medium.

Speech at the launching of Selected Speeches of Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam, Mauritius High Commission, London, 8th May 1979.

Copyright Succession Keharsingh Jagatsingh

Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan

When I was in Nairobi in July last I heard a tape-recorded speech of Dr. Radhakrishnan which he had delivered in that city while inaugurating an educational institution a few days before I stopped there. I Delhi I have listened to him on three occasions: once, when he presided over a lecture on What is Buddhism? by U Nu of Burma and twice at special convocations at Delhi University. These added only a little to the picture of the great philosopher I had conjured up for myself on seeing his pictures or while going through his books. But on Monday last I had the pleasure of coming face to face with India's socratic philosopher-statesman and during the half an hour I spent with him I was indeed overwhelmed by his charm and bonhomie about which I had read and heard so much.

Dr. Radhakrishnan is now well advanced in age, he is over 68. Though he looks a bit tired yet his way of talking which reflects a happy choice of words pronounced impeccably, flowing out in quick succession and as if charged with a kind of driving power which immediately convinces and simultaneously appeals directly to the heart of the listener, betrays a youthful vitality. His fascinating smile which illuminates his face -- a face capped with a bald head with a few lashes of grey hair, a face radiating wisdom and learning -- and his gentle and friendly way of addressing people puts, at the very outset, his interlocutor at ease. When his secretary showed me in, he was reading and on seeing me he came forward and greeted me.There I was beholding in front of me the Vice-President of the world's largest democratic republic, Asia's leading philosopher and one of the most commanding personalities of the world wearing a simple white dhoti and with a large shawl wrapped round his shoulders! Could there be a more vivid example of plain living and high thinking? Was it not in some way a paradox that such a high dignitary should have donned so simple an attire? Perhaps, but not from the Indian point of view because Radhakrishnan represents par excellence the great Indian traditions which since millenia have been advocating the primacy of the spiritual over the material.

Dr. Radhakrishnan inquired about life in Mauritius and said that he used to receive letters from Mauritius. When he spoke about his recent visit to East Africa where he received a thunderous welcome, I expressed how sorry we felt when we learnt that he could not extend his visit to our Island. Concerning our problems, especially when I referred to the canard of extreme nationalism raised in connection with the Indo-Mauritian community which was supposed to seek annexation of Mauritius to India, he commented: "Oh, no. We do not want such things. Gone are those days. No country is permanent, no civilisation is eternal. These things come and go. What we must do is to contribute to human welfare, to alleviate human suffering. Only the other day I told a gathering -- Christ died on the cross, it was physical death but spiritual survival. But you are struggling for physical survival and spiritual death". Continuing he said: "Gone are the days of domination or narrow nationalism or separatism. I feel at home everywhere. Whether it is England or America or East Africa or Indonesia or Japan -- it's the same to me. Now is the age of broad, world nationalism". He spoke about the great problem confronting India and how they were trying to bring about changes striking at the root of social inequalities like the caste system, provincialism and other social ills.

Radhakrishnan is indeed a unique personality. In the West, whose philosophy he has thoroughly mastered, expounded and interpreted, he is regarded as a link, a bridge-builder between the East and the West and a philosophical bilinguist; in the East he is regarded as the very embodiment of the renaissance of Hinduism which to use his own words, "is not a definite dogmatic creed, but a vast, complex, but subtly unified mass of spiritual thought and realisation. Its tradition of the godward endeavour of the human spirit has been continuously enlarging through the ages". Radhakrishnan represents the latest "enlargement" of Hinduism.

In a world which has shrunk so much that one can "breakfast in Bombay, lunch in London and dine in New York," in a world in which man is no more cut off from his fellow beings by mountains and oceans but by ideological barriers of his own making, Radhakrishnan's broad philosophical perspective and universal outlook hold out a unifying link, a bridge. It does not matter who made the bridge or what it is made of; what really matters is whether it is going to be used. Undoubtedly in tiny Mauritius, where we, people of different races and cultures, have been cast together and where we seem to believe in supremacy, where we tend to accentuate our differences instead of exploring what we have in common, Radhakrishnan's philosophy is not without significance.

Mauritius Times, Friday 22nd March, 1957.

Copyright Succession Keharsingh Jagatsingh

Chou En-Lai

Until I left for India in 1956 I did not have what one could consider a fair and reasonable view of China and the Chinese. In those days in Mauritius the ethnic communities were living in watertight social compartments and as communities we were hardly interested in each other. My knowledge of China and the Chinese was limited to what I could make out of my relationships with our household shopkeeper and one or two of my school friends who were of Chinese origin. All this amounted to nothing much but my interest in Chinese history and civilization was roused when I read Lin Yu Tang's Wisdom of China and The Legacy of China edited by Raymond Dawson. These two books opened my mind to an area of world history which I have found most rewarding. All the same it is true to say that when I left for my first trip overseas in 1956, China did not mean much to me.

But when I reached New Delhi and started my attachment on The Times of India I developed a keen interest in Indian affairs and in those days China figured substantially in India's view of the world specially of the regions close to her. Geopolitically India could not do otherwise and to the extent it was possible I followed closely the development of Sino-Indian relations. I then realised that China was an important factor in international affairs and that gradually she would emerge as a major power not just in South East Asia but it was clear that she was poised to gain the status of a world power within a reasonable period of time.

Those were the days when India and China were "immortal" friends and Nehru and Chou En-Lai were the de facto leaders of the developing countries. India was pressing for the admission of China to the United Nations but practically all the Western powers led by the United States were opposed to China. It was in Delhi, in November 1956, that I met Chou En-Lai for the first time. I talked to him at Palam Airport and later I spoke to him again at a reception at the Chinese Embassy in New Delhi. We spoke to each other in French and he said he knew about Mauritius.

By the time I left India in 1957 there were signs that the relations between India and China would not remain as rosy as everybody thought. Problems has begun to emerge about their boundaries and matters went from bad to worse until the 1962 border war between the two countries. I was then back in Mauritius and was already a Member of Parliament, People of Indian origin in Mauritius were really taken aback, and a group of friends and I raised a substantial amount of assistance for India. I know that that did not please my Chinese friends and later on I was politely and discreetly so informed.

But my real meeting with Chou En-Lai took place in January 1973 in Beijing. My wife and I were invited by the Chinese Government. We saw quite a bit of the country and I did my very best to understand the Chinese and their own experiment as a large Communist country. My hosts wanted to impress upon me that they had done very well in industrial and agricultural development. They were most unhappy with the USSR who they considered stabbed them in the back by withdrawing all the Russian technicians overnight. This was told to me by everybody including Chou En-Lai himself. Mao Tse-Tung was the be-all and the end-all of everything and at an infant school which we visited we realised that even the infants were being taught about the importance and the all-pervasive influence of Mao Tse-Tung.

I  could see that the Chinese had already made tremendous progress in the production of vehicles and machine tools. The factory I saw was most impressive and it was more than evident that the Chinese were in the throes of a major industrial breakthrough. Men and women were given equal tasks in the factories and naturally they were all dressed in the traditional Mao uniform. The women looked flat-chested and it did appear to me that it was all artificial. I did not like it as I failed to see in the whole experiment anything like equality between men and women.

We were invited to visit a commune. From what I saw I realised that it was a successful experiment. The idea of trying to make each commune as self-sufficient as possible is a great one. I cannot say how successful the experiment has been all over China but the one I saw was really impressive. The people in that  particular commune were fully motivated and they controlled and really ruled the place. It was clean and orderly. In fact it was oppressively clean. The people in the commune produced all the electricity they required and practically the totality of their agricultural crops. Only high-cost inputs were supplied from outside. However, I had the impression that social life was rather dreary. There was a definite lack of social amenities although I was assured that steps were being taken to improve the situation.

I must mention an incident which I found most interesting and which I had recorded in my notes. One of the leading lights if the commune got very friendly with me and I started questioning him on matters not directly related to the economics of the commune life. I asked him whether he was married and if yes where did he meet his wife. The reply was that they had met in a factory and got engaged and were subsequently married. Was there any kind of marriage ceremony?" I asked. The answer was in the negative but I was told that there was no priest or anyone else involved except the official at the registration office. I then inquired whether there was any celebration after the wedding. Yes, there was. There was a little gathering in the evening at the bridegroom's house where they all shared some beer. I asked my friend whether he gave his wife a present such as a piece of jewellery or something else. The answer was in the negative. "Not even a ring?" I exclaimed. "No", he said. "I bought a bicycle for my wife, he said proudly.

The meeting with Chou En-Lai took place on the 25th of January. We were convened for 10.00 p.m. and we were made to understand that we were spending only 10 minutes with China's Prime Minister. When we reached Chou En-Lai's office we were asked to pose with him for the photographers together with the ladies. After the photographs were taken, we were shown in to the Prime Minister's office but the ladies were excluded from the talks with Chou En-Lai. It was a fascinating experience and instead of a mere 10 minutes we spent one hour and 10 minutes with him. The discussion covered a lot of subjects. We talked about the Commonwealth to which Chou En-Lai reffered rather ironically as a great club. He said in very clear terms that outside forces were disrupting the peace and tranquillity of South East Asia.

That was an obvious reference to the USSR. In another direct reference to the USSR he inferred that China was living under the threat of a military attack by her military powerful neighbours. Chou En-Lai also mentioned the fact that the Russians had let them down in a rather inelegant way and at a critical moment by withdrawing their technicians who also took away all the blueprints for a large number of important projects. I could see in his face that he was almost passionate about the whole unsavoury episode.

I very discreetly suggested that relations between the major developing countries of South East Asia should be improved. I said they should patch up their differences and work for the uplift of the millions and millions of poor people of that area. Naturally, I had both India and China in mind. He again took the view that but for the interference from outside the relations between South East Asian countries would be quite normal and friendly. He very subtly parried all references to Sino-Indian problems and gave me the clear impression that he was unwilling to talk about China's relations with India. I felt he was not interested in India's overtures to China.

Chou En-Lai was not too happy at the way the rest of the world had reacted to the emergence of Communist China. When I observed that a large number of countries had already recognised China after initial hesitations and a vigirous anti-Chines campaign in the international press, he quickly retorted that more countries had recognised Bangladesh than had recognised China. He even quoted the figures form memory: 83 countries had extended diplomatic recognition to Bangladesh against 79 in the case of China.

During the entire conversation Chou En-Lai was completely relaxed and was in a really pleasant mood. He talked to us through the interpreter but every now and then he would correct the interpreter who in turn would explain again what Chou En-Lai was saying. But he was not the same Chou En-Lai I had met in 1957. His health had definitely deteriorated. His face was somewhat emaciated but he look oddly fresh. In our presence he asked for some tablets which he swallowed on the spot. Chou En-Lai was the genuine voice of China and will certainly be remembered as one of the authentic makers of modern China. It is no surprise therefore that whilst there has been a serious attempt to debunk Mao Tse-Tsung not a single irreverent reference has ever been made to Chou En-Lai.

During the discussions with the Chinese Officials we managed to get our first consignment of rice from China. The price was reasonable and the quality was quite satisfactory. We left China via Shanghai and through Hong Kong. It was the end of a happy visit and we were all sad to leave. We were leaving behind a friendly, brave and hardworking people who was bent upon catching up with the twentieth century. On my way back I returned via India and when I stopped over in New Delhi, I met Sardar Swaran Singh who was then Minister of External Affairs. He was really keen to exchange notes with me. During that period India was clearly trying to improve her relations with the Chinese. When I told Swaran Singh that the Chinese gave me the impression they were not in a hurry to patch up he was taken aback. I could hardly believe that the relations between India and China had got so bad that India's Minister of External Affairs was not in a position to gauge with a reasonable degree of accuracy the intentions of the Chinese towards his own country.

This paper was written on 7th July, 1980 and is being published for the first time.

Copyright Succession Keharsingh Jagatsingh