Skip to main content

When Russians hated development sans freedom...

It was something that took place exactly two decades ago. Those were the three days that shook the world – and me as an ideologically-driven human being. Perhaps it may also hold relevance to all those who cherish independence and freedom. It was the last-ditch attempt by the authoritarian forces in the Soviet Union to cling to power. It was morning of August 19, 1991. News came that a coup had taken place. It was early in the morning, before 9.00 am. Then, I was representing semi-left Delhi-based daily Patriot in Moscow. The then Soviet chief, Mikhail Gorbachev, already under criticism from the Communist hardline sections for allowing "too much freedom", had been put under house arrest in his outhouse in Crimea. I filed my story starting with "A coup has taken place in the Soviet Union...", factually describing how Gennady Yanayev, then Soviet vice-president, had taken over as acting president backed by hardliner Communists, a section of the top military brass and Soviet partocracy.
Immediately after telexing the story, I moved out. I went via underground metro, one of the finest in the world, with someone very close, to a hospital about 50 km away, where we had an appointment. We reached there in 40 minutes, such was the speed of the metro! My seven-year-old daughter, Hina, had accompanied me. In metro, everyone's lips were, as if, tied. I was immediately reminded of the emergency days in Delhi in 1975. People were dumb-struck, nobody talked. There was an atmosphere of fear. I could sense that. I thought Gorbachev's experiment with perestroika and glasnost had collapsed. Authoritarianism was back with a bang.
It took me about couple of hours to return. On my way back, the mood had already begun to change. People in metro were smiling, talking about what had happened, though sticking to facts. I didn't understand how this could happen in such a short duration. I decided to take a drop at Red Square. It was a festive mood! People were talking with each other, with smiles on their face. Hope had returned. Tanks had been called, but the militarymen had already begun to stop cooperating with the authorities. They were happily standing by, talking in a friendly manner with the people there. Olive branches had been pushed into the mouth of the tanks. Someone spotted my daughter, she had a small "bindi" on her forehead. "Indiski druzya", remarked a militaryman, smiling – "our Indian friends." A young couple came nearer to us, the man lifted my daughter, and put her on a tank. They snapped her photograph. "Lovely", remarked the woman. What a change it was!
I returned to my residence, went to a press conference which the coup leader, Yanayev, was to address. His hands were trembling, he refused to answer questions on Gorbachev's whereabouts. I came back, got a phone call from a top Soviet academic and Indologist, Prof Eric Komarov, a close friend who stayed on way to the Sheremetevo international airport. He began giving me minute-by-minute description on a horde of Soviet troops and tanks approaching from outside into the city. Komarov's phone calls also defied logic. People should be afraid of informing someone on phone, particularly when a coup had taken place, I thought. I concluded, the coup was collapsing, filed another story, saying exactly that, describing the change in atmosphere. In fact, I quoted Komarov as saying that the coup was "destined to collapse" – he wanted me to. Incidentally, it is the same Komarov whose study on Indian political scenario I had reported a couple of years before – he had concluded, some time in mid-1980s, on the basis of his wide travel, interviews and analysis of Indian electoral data, that India's days with one-party rule were numbered, and a multi-polar politics was about to take over. He ever predicted changes in the federal structure, saying India would possibly move towards a confederation few decades later.
That the coup collapsed in three days, on August 23, is by now part of history. Gorbachev returned, but was already powerless. His place had been taken, defacto, by Russian leader Boris Yeltsin. That it also led to the end of the Soviet regime, is also well known. The country collapsed. Russia finally withdrew from the Soviet Union forcing all other provinces that formed part of the Soviet Union to declare independence. It was the start of a new democratic experiment, something which the Russians had not experienced for decades.
But what struck me most that whatever I filed to my paper for three days was sent for screening to the then general secretary of the Communist Party of India, late Indrajeet Gupta. Gupta, I was told later, killed my stories, and sent back for publication something that I had never written – trash appeared for three continuous days in Patriot. The lesson I learned was loud and clear. First of all, freedom and independence should mean different things to different people. And, secondly, allowing ideological superimposition to manipulate facts can prove disastrous. Later, I also came to know how the then Indian ambassador in Moscow, in his early communications to Delhi, also tried to call the coup leader, Yanayev, a "friend of India", only because Yanayev once happened to be a top office-bearer of the Soviet-Indian Friendship Society!
It was truly an extended emergency in those days for the Russians wanting to get out of the Soviet Union. Despite Gorbachev's best efforts towards openness, people appeared to live a state of fear. Wide and strong roads, huge and impressive buildings, extremely well-oiled public transport system, free health and education – all of it together was enough to remind one of the powerful infrastructure the Soviets had created. It might overwhelm an outsider who would visit the country then. However, few could see what lay behind all this. Russians would disdainfully called huge buildings and wide roads "Stalin's creations". They hated development sans freedom. To them, over-centralised Soviet Union was an antidote of freedom. Even then, the ideologically-driven persons, including Indian communists and my Patriot bosses always thought the other way. One has only to recall another incident.
It was just a few months ahead of the coup. The Russian People's Congress – or Parliament – was meeting to pass a resolution to make Russia "free" of the Soviet Union, a protest of sorts against the Soviet leadership. The Soviet militia rushed to surround the People's Congress off the Red Square. Accompanied by a Lomonosov Moscow State University journalism student, I went to the spot to see how the Russian Parliament had been encircled and how people nearby on the Gorky Street reacted. Then an amateur videographer, Manu Kant came with his video camera. We penetrated into the circle, showing my press card. But not before the militia tried showing us the fear of the rifle buts. Someone intervened, and we were allowed in as foreigner journalists. The resolution was passed, only to be declared "null and void" by the Soviet regime. I filed a story saying the first signs of collapse of the Soviet Union had already become visible, and, quoting protesting Russians, I said people wanted nothing but freedom from an authoritarian regime. The story landed late in Delhi when the editors had left.
Next day morning, when I was still sleeping, that old telex ringer woke me up. My editor was online. He was angry why I had filed the story. He said, my story had been taken as lead, but this is not what Patriot readers were interested in. They were interested in keeping the Soviet Union together, and my story gave the wrong impression. He also said, my story differed from news agency copies that had appeared in "other papers". I promptly thanked him for taking the story as lead, but said, what could I do if the country was collapsing and people thought this was the best option to fight against an authoritarian regime? Further, I said, I was the only Indian reporter present on the spot, others had filed their stories based on government-controlled Tass handout. Obviously, my story had to differ. I also told him how his "pro-Soviet newspaper correspondent" was mandhandled by militia with rifle buts, and wondered if he wanted a separate story on it. "No no, enough is enough", was the reply!


Popular posts from this blog

Surprised? Communist candidate in Ahmedabad bypoll in a Hindutva bastion

On October 11, 2019 morning, as I was scanning through daily news online (I don’t read papers now), I found that both BJP and Congress candidates from Ahmedabad’s Amraiwadi assembly constituency, which fell vacant following the victory of its BJP MLA in the Lok Sabha polls, have been asked to explain as to why they had cash in hand for election campaign, and why they did not deposit their money in a bank account. Fighting the bypoll, BJP’s Jagdish Patel and Congress’ Dharmendra Patel had declared they possessed Rs 1.81 lakh and Rs 1.70 lakh as cash in hand, respectively, for election expenditure.

Tree-felling for greenery? Gujarat govt 'accepted' proposal; awaits implementation

The other day, I went to Nadiad, a town in Central Gujarat, about 55 kilometres from Ahmedabad. For a change, I took an alternate route, which falls between two toll roads – the Expressway and the National Highway. What surprised me was, I saw truckloads of wooden logs moving to and fro on this state highway soon after I left Ahmedabad. I was immediately reminded of a "tree enthusiast" I had met in 2007. Introduced by former chief secretary PK Laheri, who was then chairman of the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd (SSNNL), Jayantibhai Lakdawala came to my Times of India office in Gandhinagar with a unique proposal, which, he said, he had put up before the Gujarat government to grow more trees.

What was wrong with Rahul Gandhi's Chowkidar chor hai campaign?

A few days back, I came across an interesting Facebook post by Vinod Chand, an FB friend. I always read his comments with great interest. This one was on Rahul Gandhi launching what he called “a broadside on Narendra Modi” during the initial phase of the campaign during the last Lok Sabha polls -- “Chowkidar chor hai.” However, during the later phase of the campaign the slogan appeared to have been dropped, not because it seemed derogatory, but perhaps because it was not having the “desired impact.”

When Gandhi said Congress can 'only die with the nation'; warned of its weedy growth

I don’t recall when, why and how, but I have been under the impression for decades that Mahatma Gandhi wanted the Congress dissolved after India attained Independence. However, a few days ago, I was pleasantly surprised on seeing a Facebook post by Hari Desai, a well-known Gujarati journalist and a Sardar Patel expert, putting on record and claiming that this, indeed, was never the case. Desai released the photograph of “Harijan”, edited by Gandhi himself, dated February 1, 1948, which carried an article by Gandhi written on January 27, 1948, three days before he was murdered, clearly stating that the “Indian National Congress ... cannot be allowed to die”, and that it can “only die with the nation.”

A top Gujarat High Court lawyer who lived and worked for the underprivileged

When I came to Ahmedabad to join as assistant editor of the Times of India in 1993, I didn’t know Girish Patel was a senior advocate of the Gujarat High Court. Apart from assisting the then editor, Tushar Bhatt, my job was to specifically look after the editorial page, which also meant I should be selecting from among the letters to the editor that we would get, edit them appropriately, and put them in the Letters to the Editor column.

Nitish Kumar a 'Modi-fied' chief minister 'refusing' to hark to reason

Yesterday, I came across an unusual Facebook post by my veteran journalist colleague, Law Kumar Mishra. It recalls an incident which took place when Mishra was posted in Rajkot as the Times of India correspondent during of the worst droughts in the region in late 1980s. At that time Amarsinh Chaudhury was Gujarat chief minister. Currently Patna, Mishra compares how Chaudhary handled drought with the way Nitish Kumar has been handling Bihar floods.

Enlightened Buddha didn't want monks to get enchanted by the glance of a woman

Some of my Dalit friends, including Martin Macwan, whom I respect as one of the best human rights activists I have met, have a great fascination for Buddhism. Nearly all Dalit rallies or functions I have attended carry with them Buddha’s photographs. Probably, one reason could be that Dalit icon Babasaheb Ambedkar converted to Buddhism because he believed this was the only religion of India which does not believe in casteism. Many Dalits, not without reason, get converted to Buddhism.

Attack on Gandhi: Where diehard Left and extreme Right appear to meet

Another Gandhi Jayanti has come and gone. Several of the top comments – some which we also published in – on this occasion hovered around US president Donald Trump calling Prime Minister Narendra Modi “father of India”. Perhaps things wouldn’t have taken a turn that it did had not Modi’s “diehard” followers like Union minister Jitendra Singh going so far as to say that those who “do not feel proud” of Trump’s comment that Modi is the “father of India”, do not consider themselves Indians.

The enigma called Amit Shah

Those were turbulent days. It was, I remember, second half of March 2002. The post-Godhra riots in Ahmedabad, as elsewhere in Gujarat, may have lost their intensity, but rioting had still not stopped. It was my first meeting with Amit Shah, Gujarat’s former minister of state for home, who has shot into prominence after the CBI arrested him in 2010 allegedly for being an accomplice in a triple murder case, involving the fake encounter of a gangster, Sohrabuddin Sheikh, his wife Kauserbi, and aide Tulsiram Prajapati. At that time, he was MLA from what then was one of the largest state assembly constituencies, Sarkhej, in Ahmedabad, with a voters’ strength of 10 lakh. All that I knew of him was, he was “very popular” in his constituency, almost invincible. He had just met chief minister Narendra Modi, and I had a very vague idea on his proximity to Modi, who had taken over reins in Gujarat.
Shah was coming out of the chief minister’s office (CMO), situated on the fifth floor of Block No…

Why Gujarat imposed mobile internet curfew during the Patel agitation

It was Wednesday, October 31, 1984. After finalizing the semi-left Link newsweekly, for which I worked then, the office driver boldly drove the Ambassador late at night through Delhi streets, which were already in the grip of anti-Sikh riots, erupted following the assassination of Indira Gandhi. The driver squeezed his way through burning vehicles. At several places we could see houses in flames and heard painful, shrieking voices. It was a ghastly scenario, of the type I had never witnessed, or even imagined, before. I reached home, a middle class South Delhi locality; to my consolation all was quiet, though we had a Sikh neighbour.