With reference to Selma's piece on Goan separatist identity," Cunha took "potshots" not only at ACL de Souza and his erstwhile Goan Voice but also at "Goan Konkani press".
Writing in Free Goa of 10-9-57, he said, "The peculiarity of the Goan Konkani press consists in the fact that those who edit it seldom write for it. It is almost entirely dependent on contributions from outsiders or on material taken from other papers or fro bulletins in Konkani distributed by special press agencies. Barring, 'Azad Goem', the Konkani nationalist organ, which contained articles and notes produced by its own staff, the other Konkani papers depend on outside contributions and other ready-made material." He said it is a "great pity" that Goans are unaware of "their wrong views about the Indian political attitude." He states, "This extremely distressful state of affairs has passed unnoticed in the official circles where nobody understands the Konkani language and therefore nobody is in a position to follow the writings of the Konkani papers, or may be because themselves are indifferent in this matter. " He gave the example of how a Konkani paper, which quoted from the "Goan Tribune" which carried a headline "Christianity in Danger?", gave it a different twist. He said that the original piece "referred not to India but to Portugal. It was a report from Lisbon purporting to say that Christianity was in danger, yes, but in Portugal!" He also said that "Goa Mail" and the "Goa Times" were "writing a lot about persecution of Catholics in India, Communism, etc., and thus creating an atmosphere of religious crisis in order to divert the attention of Goans to these subjects and to turn them hostile to the idea of Goa's integration into India. For them no method seems to be more successful than the cry of 'Religion in Danger' which was successfully used by the late Mr. Jinnah." He attacked the Konkani press saying they were "run by amateurs and not by trained journalists." He also had no kind words for the readers, saying "Goan masses, who due to their semi-literacy, resort to this only source of knowledge and information." Cunha was also very critical of The Examiner, the organ of the Archdiocese of Bombay, which he felt was the voice of the Portuguese propaganda machine. He did not spare Cardinal Valerian Gracias in the light of the controversy regarding "foreign missionaries" in India, which resulted in the Niyogi Commission Report. He called into question Cardinal Gracias's "candid belief in the superior training of foreign missionaries" so as to retain them in India. Cunha wrote, "The Cardinal's undignified and shameless declaration will certainly be resented by many of his Indian subordinates who are conscious of their own worth and who have moreover correctly estimate the real worth of their foreign colleagues who owe their superior position to the sole fact that they belong to some imperialist country." He further states, "He is himself the living proof of the denationalizing influence of the foreign missionaries, which has been denounced in the Report of the Inquiry Commission." Ironically, Cardinal Gracias gave his blessing to the final assault on Portuguese rule when he approved India's takeover of Goa, something that perhaps would have made Cunha change his view on the Cardinal. I disagree with Selma that Cunha would have been happy with the label of a "pamphleteer". Nationalist newspapers of the day had a mission and Free Goa served its purpose and aim with well-thought out writings. It rallied its facts against agents that it considered to be against the nationalist interests of Goans. It did not indulge in "mendacious propaganda", a charge that Cunha labelled against "The Economist" of London went it carried a piece by Miss M. da Silva in its July 21, 1956 issue. Miss da Silva writes, "The Goan Catholics do not want a merger with India chiefly because of the caste system in the Indian Union, and because they do not enjoy the full rights of free worship; one has only to read the various complaints made by the Indian Cardinal Gracious (sic), Archbishop of Bombay to realize the hardship which Catholics face in the Union." Cunha fought against Salazar, the Church, the Padrado and the Estado with the force of his arguments and the force of his belief that Goa would one day be free of Portuguese rule. The glamouring for a "special status" for Goa today is similar to the sympathetic tones of those who were crying for the separation of Goa from the rest of India, just as Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon. Would Pondicherry been a "separate" country if France wished it? No doubt a small but strong group of pro-Portuguese Goans carried on this idea but, unfortunately, their noises were not heard by Salazar. He turned a dear ear to their wails. If only these "elite" Goans had the power of influence over the Portuguese government, Goa indeed would have been a "separate" nation. Salazar's stubbornness cost these Goans their dream. The first international Goan meeting in Paris by these few Goans to advocate Goa's cause for a separate nation failed to win them Salazar's nod. Cunha was no less severe on Goa's official historian, as he disdainfully puts in quotes the word Professor when he writes, "Professor" Pandurang Pissurlenkar whose very profession has for its object the distortion of history to the advantage of Portugal For this service of lying he has been awarded the medial of the Cross of Christ." He goes on to attack another Goan who, he thinks, shaped Salazar's knowledge of Goa. He says, "Another notorious Goan renegade who has contributed to enrich Dr. Salazar's knowledge of Goa is the late Dr. Froilano de Melo who claimed great discoveries in medical science without having treated a single patient nor worked in a decent laboratory." The politics of Goans in India and Goans in East Africa, particularly Kenya, differed vastly. To distinguish Goans from the rest of Indians would have been foolish on the part of the British. With the exception of few Goans who regarded themselves as Indians first and Goans afterwards, the rest of Goans in Kenya were aloof, firmly cocooned in their jobs and homes. Nationalist ideas, whether in the cause of Kenya's freedom struggle or India's fight for freedom, did not stir their hearts nor souls. For them, Goa became a "holiday home." In such an atmosphere, Goan Voice was no different in its approach than those like Goa Mail and Goa Times. That an exception man like Pio de Gama Pinto rose from the Goan ranks to be in the forefront of Kenya's freedom struggle is silver lining in the history of Goans and their love from their adopted country. Kenya was to be a recluse country that provided luxuries of life, even if it was a backward country. Maybe ACL de Souza "wondered" the role of Goan in an independent Kenya, if the Goan would at all be a "Kenyan" or if the Goan would be considered a "Kenyan." Goans ran from Kenya the moment Kenya became independent, in sharp contrast to the Goans who were expelled from Uganda. This syndrome has been well captured in Mississippi Masala, a film by Mira Nair, who explores the dilemma of an Indian (or call it Asian) who believes he is Ugandan in heart and mind. The truth dawns in him that he is not wanted in the new Uganda. The course of history changes and with it our destinies. Goans who claimed Portuguese citizenships are no less different from many of us who are "economic migrants." Many of were not born in the heat of the freedom struggle and, hence, no little or nothing of those like Cunha who gave up everything the Portuguese served up to end up in jail and live a life of a solitary soldier in the vanguard of Goa's freedom struggle. The lives of both ACL de Souza have little similarities, except that both were Goans in heart. Their minds worked in different ways. Whether Cunha would have been happy to see Goa's current state is hard to say. The fruits of liberation are often not sweet. Kenya suffers, so does Uganda. But Cunha's body rests in peace in the Sewri cemetery, disowned by the very Church he loved to hate, not for anything but for being an instrument of Portuguese propaganda in India. Or, maybe it is turning inside the grace to see the Goa he loved and cared for is "turning" into a political hell that he may have never imagined. In a letter to the Editor of the "Prachasa", June 16, 1929, Cunha he wrote about "Catholicism -- Instrument of Portugese Domination." His condemnation of the evil of Padrado as expansion of Portuguese rule and its innate desire to convert the people of countries it colonized and his attack against Catholicism earned a placed in the Scottish cemetery. His should cannot be disturbed there. As a postscript, it must be noted that Azad Goem was started by Cunha while Free Goa was "then published in Belgaum by Dr. A Furtado. Later T..Cunha became the editor of Free Goa, which carried his message the day of his death." In the caption of a photo of Cunha and his brother Francisco Braganca Cunha in Paris, it says, "en roue to India after his escape from Lisbon in 1953." Elsewhere I read that he was released after serving his term in jail. --- Eugene Correia
