12.08.04

A.Kadakin's answer to the open letter

Having sent on August, 9, this year the open letter to Alexander Kadakin, next day our edition has received the answer. Alexander Mikhailovich has sent copies of his answer to dozens of addresses among which, probably, were his colleagues and friends-roerichites. Taking into account this fact and also using the right of edition to publish all editorial mail, we publish the letter completely, in full.

 

* * *

"Dear mister [editor],
I thank you for the letter. I do not make secret of the fact that there are so many questions in it that it is not possible to answer them all. I shall try to answer the most important ones.

1. There never was a personal assignment of the Kullu museum assistant manager by Y. M. Vorontsov from the Russian side. The decision was accepted at the Trust meeting unanimously by both Indian and the Russian representatives. Competition on this post is not required, as ICR from the very beginning, that is even before registration of IRMT, since 1991, rendered all help and assistance in organizing IRMT. Except ICR, NOBODY, ABSOLUTELY NOBODY of the Roerich world helped me, to the embassy or to the Trust. In this situation what competition could be announced?
As to Khanduri, the competition was held because of the demands of the Indian civil service, to which he belongs. He gets his salary from his Government and not from the Trust. By the way, as a worker he is good for nothing and the Trust gets rid of him by decision of the trustees full staff.

2. The IRMT Internet-site is created. The embassy assists, but, being diplomatic mission, can no interfere in activity of such PUBLIC ORGANIZATION as Trust. The embassy, enjoying full rights, takes part in the work of Trust, but does not lord it. Any actions are coordinated with the Himachal Pradesh government, the main minister of which (Virbhandra Singh) is the Trust president. All the roerichites should understand that Kullu is not Russian patrimony or estate but a JOINT Indian-Russian project that must adequately preserve our common and as a matter of fact world cultural-philosophical and material property of the Roerichs.

3. Concerning registration of the Roerich symbols I can only say that Svetoslav Nikolaevich Roerich has ENTIRELY transferred all rights to the publication of works and symbols to the International Center of the Roerichs, I am an eye-witness of it. Not to be lost in the labyrinth of casuistry, I think, that as he was the last of the Roerichs he had the right to act like this. This right prevails that what was determined by Nikolay Konstantinovich many decades ago when also the Trust and ICR did not exist at all. It is my own opinion. Lawyers should study this question. I do not doubt at all the ICR competence to use the symbols.

4. On August, 10 the Trust executive council meeting will take place. I think, that the important decisions on celebrating the 100th anniversary of S. N. Roerich will be accepted. The main task, as I see it, is worthy carrying out of all celebrations instead of arguing to whom and what belongs on competition or without it. The Roerichs belong equally to Russia and India, and to all mankind.

5. Since August, 3 a new ambassador in India is V. I. Trubnikov. I shall continue cooperation with IRMT as I founded it on a commission from S. N. Roerich. Indeed, with participation of the Indian friends it is made much in Kullu. The fact, that more than 100 thousand people visit the house a year, speaks for itself. The government of India repeatedly provided with half a million of American dollars in total for repair and the maintenance of the museum and the gallery. No country in the world did and does so much as the government of India does for preservation of Russian, and as a matter of fact Russian-Indian, heritage of the Roerichs. The Russian patrons of art from industrial and bank circles have considerably helped too.

I wish you all blessings and successes. I hope, that work on the worthy 100th anniversary of Svetoslav Nikolaevich celebrating becomes the mainstream of your organization's work. It is not time and not a place now, before the celebration, to undertake any investigations of the questions specified in your letter to me ant in your appeals. Any conflicts in proving primacy or secondariness of the rights to the Roerichs only testify that still there are many people in the world that aspire to not immortalizing of their works, creativity and even a material heritage ( Kullu, Bangalore, Kalimpong etc.), but to immortalize themselves under the pretext of the Roerichs. I am sure, it would be impossible to the Roerichs.

Good-bye!
Yours faithfully,
A. M. Kadakin"

After receiving an answer from Alexander Mikhailovich our edition has thanked him for the rendered respect to readers of our site and has offered him to continue the dialogue with the purpose to find out some questions. Alexander Michailovich has not reacted to the offer in any way. Questions remained undecided.

The comment no the A. Kadakin's letter of Daniel Entin, Director of Nicholas Roerich Museum, New York, makes the situation in Kullu somehow clear. We suggest that the readers should make the acquaintance with the D. Entin's opinion, and then they should continue reading of the editorial staff to the A. Kadakin's answer.

The comment of edition on A. M. Kadakin's letter

Let us comment the A. M. Kadakin's words in the sequence given in his letter:

1. To my question, why competition for getting the post of the assistant manager of the International Roerich Memorial Trust does not appear, Alexander Mikhailovich declares that there is no question about that, because "NOBODY ABSOLUTELY NOBODY', except for ICR, helped the Trust. It is difficult to believe it. D. Entin in the comment confirms it. It means that the member of the IRMT Board Alexander Kadakin simply tried to lead into error readers of our site. But what for? Probably to keep for the ICR Board the right of individual assignment of the assistant manager of the house in Kullu. According to the style of the ICR board of officials it is possible to assume that they (Kadakin and Vorontsov) have not admitted any representative of the Roerich world to the IRMT tutorial council structure who would stand in opposition to ICR (and they are not a few but maybe the majority). So to find out a true state of affairs it is necessary to address to the Indian members of the IRMT tutorial council, and in particular, to its president Vibhadra Singh. Our edition will take this step with the purpose to find out a real state of affairs in Kullu. It is especially necessary as Alexander Kadakin is no more the ambassador of Russia in India. Whether he will be in India or will be compelled to leave the country, we do not know. Whether the new ambassador will render so much attention to IRMT as it did Alexander Kadakin, we do not know too. Therefore we shall hope for skill to communicate of the Indian representatives of the Trust.

2. The questions about plans for development of the Roerichs buildings complex in Kullu remained undecided. What will be development of institute "Urusvati"? If it will be decided to make a scientific centre working on themes of Living Ethics, it is clear that participation of the western and American sides will be necessary since only in these countries it is possible to get a required high-quality scientific equipment. Besides, the European and American sciences have already made many steps to Living Ethics not knowing about that. If to acknowledge these achievements, which in the West have already got popularity and recognition, it will be much easier to modern institute "Urusvaty" to join the high-tech scientific world. It means that wide international cooperation with the project of giving a new life to institute "Urusvati" is necessary. So in this case it is necessary to involve not only Russia and India, but also other countries. It is natural, that it should do roerichites because only those scientists can work in institute "Urusvati' who know and study Living Ethics instead of the scientists who do not know it. It is an important principle which should be followed.
If the Trust does not wish to develop scientific activity, then IRMT having present structure will settle the museum matter. But in any case it is necessary to find out plans of the IRMT tutorial council.

3. Concerning prevalence of the rights of the son S. N. Roerich, over the right of the father, N. K. Roerich, D. Entin has told precisely enough. Our edition joins the opinion of director of Nicholas Roerich Museum in New York.

4. Our edition is little interested in celebrations and the public actions directed on popularization of the name of the Roerichs. Undoubtedly, these actions are necessary, but our site is devoted, basically, to philosophical and scientific comprehension of Living Ethics, instead of "worthy carrying out of celebrations". Therefore we leave this item without comment.

5. Concerning a place and time of investigation in the field of unworthy use of symbols and names of Living Ethics our edition considers that finding out of truth and searches of the best ways of decision of conflict situations will be the best gift to the Roerichs, roerichites and to all earthmen. Any hushing up and absence of information create effect of a muddy water in which, as is known, pikes very easily swallow small crucian carps.

Therefore our edition supports crystal honesty and transparency. It is our credo.

© is free