'Sexual weirdo', 'closet racist': Look who's opposing a Gandhi statue in UK's Parl Square

A “sexual weirdo”?  A racist"?  And a “reactionary proponent of the caste system” ? This is not quite how one thinks of Mahatma  Gandhi, the saintly figure of our popular imagination who inspired men such as Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela, and is revered in India as the Father of the Nation. Yet, it is precisely on these grounds –Gandhi’s alleged sexual “deviance” and “racism” –that the British Government is facing growing pressure to abandon its much publicised plan to build a statue of him in London’s Parliament Square to stand alongside those of some of the world’s other great statesmen. The plan, announced by the Chancellor of Exchequer George Osborne and the then Foreign Secretary William Hague on their recent visit to India, coincides with the upcoming 400th anniversary celebrations of Indo-British relations. But now a blazing row has erupted with several Indian-origin groups opposing the move arguing that Gandhi’s “despicable sexual exploitation of women” to test his celibacy and his covert approval of the caste system make him unsuitable for such an honour. Crucially, its most  high- profile and vocal critic also happens to be  chair of the anniversary celebrations and she has vowed to do her “damnedest” to stop the government from going ahead. [caption id=“attachment_1672029” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Kusoom Vadgama who is leading the campaign opposing the statue of Gandhi[/caption] Kusoom Vadgama, founder of the Indo-British Heritage Trust, has called the proposed statue “an affront” to Indian women and launched a public petition against it. " I’m not going to go away quietly," she told Firstpost, pointing out that the recent spate of incidents of rape and hanging of victims of sexual assaults in India have “forced” her to speak up. “There is something very  unpleasant about this statue in Parliament Square and I will do my damnedest to stop it.” The 82 -year-old Indian-origin eye specialist and author of several books on the history of India-British relations, said that she grew up “revering” Gandhi for his anti-colonial struggle but changed her mind when she read that he used young women for his “self- designed celibacy test”. “I looked upon him as God … I used to fast when he fasted, I preached Gandhi- ism but when I learned about what he did to women including his own grand- niece I was disgusted.” Quivering with anger Ms Vadgama told me she knew she would be “pilloried” for attacking Gandhi but exploitation of women was  too serious a matter to be buried quietly. “No man, hero or a villain has the right to put women to this level of debasement. What is unbelievable is that nobody dare point a finger at Gandhi. It has taken me decades to speak openly. I spoke up after the recent abuse, killing and hanging of women in India. It was such an  emotional thing that I couldn’t remain silent any more.” Others who have waded into the row include the pro- Khalistani Sikh Federation (UK), and Dalit activists. The Federation’s chief Bhai Amrik Singh has written to Culture Secretary Sajid Javid  describing Gandhi as a “sexual weirdo” and  “anti- Sikh “. Gandhi “discriminated on the basis of the Hindu caste system which is outlawed in the UK” and it would be “totally inappropriate” to confer an official honour on him, the letter says. Dalits say Gandhi was a “closet racist” arguing that he contributed to “normalising” the caste system by  using the euphemism Harijans ( children of God ) to describe its victims. “He didn’t do anything to fight casteism but simply gave it a nice sounding label,” said one campaigner. And that is just the Indian diaspora saying “no” to yet another Gandhi statue in London when there is already one barely a few miles away in Tavistock Square. Several heavyweight British politicians and commentators have also attacked the move though for different reasons. They believe it is a “cheap and cynical stunt “, as one put it, to buy favours with New Delhi at a time when Britain is desperately trying to sell arms to India.  Dubbing it a “statue for arms” scandal , former Labour deputy prime minister John Prescott said that “to trade off an arms deal with the statue of a man who typified peaceful protest goes against all that he believed in”. Others have pointed out that Gandhi was not a parliamentarian and, therefore, it makes no sense to have his bust in Parliament Square. A more suitable choice would have been Dadabhai Naoroji, the first Indian origin MP elected to British Parliament in 1892. The right-wing media has seized on it to push its own xenophobic agenda asking, ‘why do we need another foreigner’s statue when there are enough Brits who are worthy of such an honour?’ But it is really the issues raised by Indian campaigners that are making the headlines for two reasons: * They feed into India’s image as a sexist and casteist society with people asking :“Et tu Gandhi?”; * they chime with the domestic debate around “historic claims” of sexual abuse of vulnerable women by high- profile public figures including politicians. The problem with the campaign is not, as some have alleged, that it is “disrespectful” of Gandhi or that  Ms Vadgama is  “nitpicking” . It is rather that it has turned into a bit of a bandwagon on which all sorts of groups with a vested interest in bashing Gandhi have jumped on. In fact Ms Vadgama is conscious of it and is at pains to distance herself from those who are using it for their own political purposes. Another problem is that it conflates one aspect of Gandhi’s private life —scandalous though it was –with his public life whose profound moral influence on the world  is not contested even by his worst critics. Yes, no doubt, he was a complex man and, indeed, a bit of a reactionary on social issues. Even his politics was not exactly progressive and many including Nehru looked upon his policy of non- violence with scepticism. But ultimately he left a legacy that found him a place not only on the right side of history but also on “the right side of morality” as one India observer wrote in The Times. In Parliament Square there are already statues of 10 British and world leaders; and not one of them could claim to have an unblemished private life. And that includes Nelson Mandela. But fair play to Ms Vagdama for reminding the world that even Gandhi’s cupboard was not without skeletons. She says she knows that she is “not going to win’’ but has ensured that the statue “will never have good vibes’’. Suddenly, there is a big question mark over the British government’s grand gesture which, in a breathless speech in Delhi last month, Mr Osborne hailed as “fitting tribute …and a permanent monument to our friendship with India’’.