The worst thing that had happened to India post-Independence was the Internal Emergency imposed by Mrs Indira Gandhi on June 25, 1975. She signed her own death warrant by sanctioning the Blue Star Operation – the codename for the Army raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar (Punjab) to flush out Sikh separatists (hiding in it) who had been demanding an independent homeland called Khalistan. The Sikhs were deeply hurt by her decision to storm the Golden Temple.
Her son Rajiv Gandhi was the Prime Minister of India when the Sikh massacre took place (November 1-3, 1984) in Delhi. The state pogrom against the Sikhs – to avenge the killing of Mrs Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards – was carried out right under the nose of Rajiv Gandhi. He didn’t do enough to stop the carnage. On the contrary, he justified the three-day horror by making a controversial statement saying, “When a big tree falls, the earth is bound to shake.”
Now, despite these unpardonable incidents, both Indira and Rajiv are revered figures in India. They have been criticised, but never written off even by the worst critics. The reason is – these incidents don’t sum up their whole story, rather they are only a few scenes of the entire episode. They have done some good work also. People in India remember that and have given the duo their due by immortalising them in statues across the country.
Hitherto, no one has ever protested for erecting their statues or campaigned for removing them.
On the contrary, there are reputed educational institutes in their name like Indira Gandhi National Open University (New Delhi), Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (Karnataka), to name a few.
The mother-son duo paid a heavy price for their misdeeds. Both had violent deaths, ultimately. But Indians – though never condoned their wrongdoings – had only sympathy for them and mourned their loss.
These two Indian leaders were no less evil than Cecil Rhodes. Both were power hungry and did their utmost to remain in power and decimated anyone who came in their way. Perhaps they were never seen or perceived as someone with an evil bent of mind. Also, they were never called racist or imperialist – which are strong words and make headlines. And that’s where Cecil Rhodes becomes a bigger villain relatively.
Well, I completely agree that Indira-Rajiv cannot be compared with Rhodes. They had done many a good work for India, but no one can deny that they too had their share of wrongdoings. And I cannot look the other way.
However, their wrongdoings should not pave the way for the removal of their statues in India.
Similarly, Rhodes may have played a significant role in the colonisation of Africa, he cannot be admired in an ideal world, but calling for the removal of his statue in Oxford does not serve any purpose. Instead of his statue, his legacy should fall.
Oxford should not condone his actions. If there is racism in Oxford, that should be dealt with firmly. We should recognise our past and must not cover up the history that we are not proud of. No need to rewrite the history. If there is a bad chapter in history – learn from it, rather than pretend that there was no such thing in the past. Instead of #Rhodesmustfall campaign, we should fight for a just and sound education system. If the statue is an emblem of his dubious past, then it is also a symbol of his financial largesee.
The Rhodes Scholarships have allowed 8,000 students from around the world to study at Oxford, including former US President Bill Clinton and former Australian PM Tony Abbott.
Rather than removing the statue, it is far better we remember and learn from what the statue represents. Otherwise, by the same logic, we should demolish Auschwitz as well. Nearly one million Jews were killed by the Nazi Germany in the concentration camp during the World War II.
The #Rhodesmustfall campaigners are right when they say Rhodes was a racist and imperialist and held views that would tore him apart today. But removing his statue would not absolve him of his wrongdoings.
Tony Abbott, ex-Australian PM, who is a Rhodes Scholar, claimed it would ‘damage the university’s standing’ if it were to remove the monument.
The former Australian Prime Minister told The Independent: ‘Rhodes was a man of his times. We can lament that he failed to oppose unjust features of society while celebrating the genius that led to the scholarships.”
Historic England, which protects listed buildings, said ancient structures help people to ‘understand and debate’ the past even if they sometimes bring up ‘uncomfortable truths’.
Forcefully removing such statues can be compared to the destructive actions of Islamic State or the Taliban destroying Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan when the militant group held sway in the war-torn country. Today IS is destroying ancient sites in Syria.
The Rhodes statue was installed in 1906 in recognition of the vast sums he donated to the university. Many foreign students have since benefited by studying at Oxford on Rhodes Scholarships.
Rhodes was a famous imperialist, and Rhodesia – now Zambia and Zimbabwe – was named after him. However campaigners say he paved the way to apartheid by introducing discriminatory laws in southern Africa.
For students, keeping Rhodes statue is like putting him on a pedestal, which alludes to approving his legacy.
Inspired by a popular movement that forced the removal of a statue of Rhodes at the University of Cape Town in South Africa, campaigners now have been asking Oriel College at Oxford to do the same.
By the way, Oriel College at Oxford has agreed to remove a plaque featuring a bust of Rhodes and to a six-month “listening exercise” from February on whether to remove the statue. It will seek views and ideas of students and staff of the college and the University, alumni, heritage bodies, Oxford City Council, residents of Oxford and other members of the public.
The college said Rhodes’s values “stand in absolute contrast to the ethos of the scholarship programme today and to the values of a modern University”.
However, Chris Patten, Oxford’s Chancellor, spoke against removing the Rhodes statue. “Our history is not a blank page on which we can write our own version of what it should have been, according to our contemporary views and prejudices,” he said.
Patten told BBC Radio 4 that Oxford should welcome debate on historical issues, no matter how uncomfortable, but that taking aim at physical monuments was the wrong way to go.
“Our cities are full of buildings that were built with the proceeds of activities, the slave trade and so on, which would nowadays be regarded as completely unacceptable,” he said.
He asked rhetorically what should be done about Trinity College in Cambridge, which was founded by King Henry VIII, who had two of his six wives executed.
Rhodes was a Victorian-era tycoon and politician who founded the De Beers diamond company, created Rhodesia and is seen as a founding father of South Africa.
Revered by some and reviled by others as a racist, his legacy remains controversial 100 years after his death – including Oxford’s Rhodes scholarship, which boasts many high-profile recipients.
A student at Oriel in his youth, Rhodes left the college money when he died, which helped fund the construction of the building where his statue stands on the facade.
One letter writer to the Daily Telegraph argued: “The trouble is that almost every person of that era held opinions that were commonplace at the time but are at odds with modern thinking. Taken to its extreme, this approach would lead to the eradication of almost every building and statue commemorating notable figures of the past, including the Albert Memorial and Nelson’s Column.”
Ironically, the main man behind the #Rhodesmustfall campaign, South African Ntokozo Qwabe, was himself named a Rhodes Scholar last year.
However, he has defended himself against charges of hypocrisy – saying that he is taking back some of the money that Rhodes took from Africa.
“I’m no beneficiary of Rhodes. I’m a beneficiary of the resources and labour of my people which Rhodes pillaged and slaved,” he wrote on Facebook.
Meanwhile, students at a second Oxford college have joined a campaign to whitewash the legacy of Cecil Rhodes. Undergraduates at University College have voted to change the name of its Rhodes computer room.
The room at University College, where former US President Bill Clinton studied under a Rhodes scholarship, was not named directly after Rhodes but to reflect the generosity of former scholars who paid for the computer suite more than 30 years ago. A final decision on whether it is renamed will be taken by the college rather than its undergraduate body.
