In
1939 the Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, declared India a belligerent state on
the side of Britain in WW2 without consulting Indian political
leaders or the elected provincial representatives.
CWC Meeting at
Wardha (September 10-14, 1939):
Different opinions were voiced on the
question of Indian support to British war efforts:
- Gandhi
advocated an unconditional support to the Allied powers as he made a clear
distinction between the democratic states of Western Europe and the
totalitarian Nazis.
- Subhash
Bose and the socialists argued that the war was an imperialist one since
both sides were fighting for gaining or defending colonial territories.
Therefore, the question of supporting either of the two sides did not
arise. Instead, advantage should be taken of the situation to wrest
freedom by immediately starting a civil disobedience movement.
- Nehru
made a sharp distinction between democracy and Fascism. He believed that
justice was on the side of Britain, France and Poland, but he was also
convinced that Britain and France were imperialist powers, and that the
war was the result of the inner contradictions of capitalism maturing
since the end of World War I.He, therefore, advocated no Indian
participation till India itself was free. However, at the same time, no
advantage was to be taken of Britain’s difficulty by starting an immediate
struggle.
The CWC resolution condemned Fascist
aggression. It said that:
- India
could not be party to a war being fought ostensibly for democratic
freedom, while that freedom was being denied to India
- if
Britain was fighting for democracy and freedom, it should prove it by
ending imperialism in its colonies and establishing full democracy in
India;
- the
Government should declare its war aims soon and, also, as to how the
principles of democracy were to be applied to India.
- The
Congress leadership wanted to give every chance to the viceroy and the
British Government.
Government’s
Response:
- The
Government’s response was entirely negative. Linlithgow,
in his statement (October 17, 1939), tried to use the Muslim League and
the princes against the Congress.The Viceroy in statement claimed
that Britain is waging a war driven by the motif to strengthen peace in
the world. He also stated that after the war, the government would
initiate modifications in the Act of 1935, in accordance to the desires of
the Indians.
- The
Government:
- Refused
to define British war aims beyond stating that Britain was resisting
aggression;
- Said
it would, as part of future arrangement, consult “representatives of
several communities, parties and interests in India, and the Indian
princes” as to how the Act of 1935 might be modified;
- Said
it would immediately set up a “consultative committee” whose advice could
be sought whenever required.
Government’s
Hidden Agenda:
- Linlithgow’s
statement was not an aberration, but a part of general British policy “to
take advantage of the war to regain the lost ground from the Congress” by
provoking the Congress into a confrontation with the Government and then
using the extraordinary situation to acquire draconian powers. Even before
the declaration of the war, emergency powers had been acquired for the
centre in respect of provincial subjects by amending the 1935 Act.
- Defence
of India ordinance had been enforced the day the war was declared, thus
restricting civil liberties. In May 1940, a top secret Draft Revolutionary
Movement Ordinance had been prepared, aimed at launching crippling
pre-emptive strikes on the Congress. The Government could then call upon
the
- Allied
troops stationed in India. It could also win an unusual amount of liberal
and leftist sympathy all over the world by painting an aggressive Congress
as being pro-Japan and pro-Germany.
- British
Indian reactionary policies received full support from Prime Minister
Winston Churchill and the Secretary of State, Zetland, who branded the
Congress as a purely Hindu organisation.
- It
became clear that the British Government had no intention of loosening its
hold, during or after the war, and was willing to treat the Congress as an
enemy. Gandhi reacted sharply to the Government’s insensitivity to Indian
public opinion—” … there is to be no democracy for India if Britain can
prevent it.” Referring to the minorities and other special interests,
Gandhi said, “Congress will safeguard minority rights provided they do
not advance claims inconsistent with India’s independence.”
On October 23, 1939, the CWC meeting:
- Rejected
the viceroy’s statement as a reiteration of the old imperialist policy,
- Decided
not to support the war, and
- Called
upon the Congress ministries to resign in the provinces.
- Gandhi’s
reaction to Linlithgow’s statement of October 1939 was; “the old
policy of divide and rule is to continue. The
Congress has asked for bread and it has got stone.”
- Congress
Provincial Governments from eight provinces resigned .The resignation of
the ministers was an occasion of great joy and rejoicing for leader of the
Muslim League, Mohammad Ali Jinnah. He called the day of 22 December 1939
‘The Day of Deliverance‘.
- In
January 1940, Linlithgow stated, “Dominion status of Westminster
variety, after the war, is the goal of British policy in India.”
Debate on the
Question of Immediate Mass Satyagraha:
- After Linlithgow’s statement of October 1939,
the debate on the question of immediate mass struggle began once again.
- Gandhi and his supporters were not in favour
of an immediate struggle because they felt that the:
- Allied cause was just;
- Communal sensitivity and lack of Hindu-Muslim
unity could result in communal riots;
- Congress organisation was in shambles and the
atmosphere was not conducive for a mass struggle; and
- Masses were not ready for a struggle.
- They instead advocated toning up the Congress
organisation, carrying on political work among the masses, and negotiating
till all possibilities of a negotiated settlement were exhausted. Only
then would the struggle be begun.
- The views of the dominant leadership were
reflected in the Congress resolution at the Ramgarh
session (March 1940)—”Congress would resort to civil disobedience
as soon as the Congress organisation is considered fit enough or if
circumstances precipitate a crisis.”
- A coalition of leftist
groups—Subhash Bose and his Forward Bloc, Congress Socialist Party,
Communist Party, the Royists—characterised the war as an imperialist war
giving an opportunity to attain freedom through an all-out struggle
against British imperialism.This group was convinced that the masses were
ready for action, only waiting for a call from the leadership. They
accepted hurdles, such as communalism and the shortcomings of the Congress
organisation, but thought that these would be automatically swept away in
the course of a struggle. They urged the Congress leadership to launch an
immediate mass struggle.
- Bose even proposed a parallel Congress to
organise an immediate mass struggle if the Congress leadership was not
willing to go along with them, but the CSP and CPI differed with Bose on
this.
- Nehru considered the Allied
powers as imperialists and his philosophy and political perception leant
towards the idea of an early struggle but that would have undermined the
fight against Fascism. He finally went along with Gandhi and the Congress
majority.
Pakistan Resolution—Lahore (March 1940):
- The Muslim League passed a resolution calling
for “grouping of geographically contiguous areas where Muslims are in
majority (North-West, East) into independent states in which constituent units
shall be autonomous and sovereign and adequate safeguards to Muslims where
they are in minority”.
Change of Government in England:
- In
the meanwhile, crucial political events took place in England. Chamberlain
was succeeded by Churchill as the Prime Minister and the Conservatives,
who assumed power in England, did not have a sympathetic stance towards
the claims made by the Congress.
August Offer, 8 August 1940:
- The fall of France temporarily softened the
attitude of congress in India. Britain was in immediate danger of Nazi
occupation. As the war was taking a menacing turn from the allied point of
view congress offered to cooperate in the war if transfer of authority in
India is done to an interim government. The governments response was a
statement of the viceroy known as the august offer.
- On 8 August 1940, early in the Battle of
Britain, the Viceroy of India, Lord Linlithgow,
made the so-called August Offer.The
following proposals were put in:
- The establishment of an advisory war council
- After the war a representative Indian body
would be set up to frame a constitution for India.
- Viceroy’s Executive Council would be expanded
without delay.
- The minorities were assured that the
government would not transfer power “to any system of government whose
authority is directly denied by large and powerful elements in Indian
national life.”
- For the first time, the inherent right of
Indians to frame their constitution was recognised and the Congress demand
for a constituent assembly was conceded. Dominion status was explicitly
offered.In July 1941, the viceroy’s executive council was enlarged to give
the Indians a majority of 8 out of 12 for the first time, but the whites
remained in charge of defence, finance and home. Also, a National Defence
Council was set up with purely advisory functions.
- The Congress rejected the August Offer. Nehru
said, “Dominion status concept is dead as a door nail.” Gandhi said that
the declaration had widened the gulf between the nationalists and the
British rulers.
- The Muslim League welcomed the veto assurance
given to the League, and reiterated its position that partition was the
only solution to the deadlock.
- In the context of widespread dissatisfaction
that prevailed over the rejection of the demands made by the Congress,
Gandhi at the meeting of the Congress Working Committee in Wardha revealed his plan to launch Individual Civil Disobedience.
Individual Satyagraha 1940-41:
- Towards the end of 1940, the Congress
once again asked Gandhi to take command. Gandhi now began taking steps which
would lead to a mass struggle within his broad strategic perspective
- After the August Offer, disappointed radicals
and leftists wanted to launch a mass Civil Disobedience Movement, but here
Gandhi insisted on Individual Satyagraha.
- The Individual Satyagraha was not to seek
independence but to affirm the right of speech. The other reason of this
Satyagraha was that a mass movement may turn violent and he would not like
to see the Great Britain embarrassed by such a situation.
- This view was conveyed to Lord Linlithgow by
Gandhi when he met him on September 27, 1940.
- The aims of launching individual
satyagrahas were:(i) To show that nationalist patience was not
due to weakness; (ii) to express people’s feeling that they were not
interested in the war and that they made no distinction between Nazism and
the double autocracy that ruled India; and (iii) to give another
opportunity to the Government to accept Congress’ demands peacefully.
- The non-violence was set as the centerpiece of
Individual Satyagraha. This was done by carefully selecting the
Satyagrahis.
- The first Satyagrahi
selected was Acharya Vinoba Bhave, who was
sent to Jail when he spoke against the war.
- Second Satyagrahi was
Jawahar Lal Nehru.
- Third was Brahma Datt, one of the inmates of the Gandhi’s Ashram. They
all were sent to jails for violating the Defense of India Act.
- This was followed by a lot of other people.
But since it was not a mass movement, it attracted little enthusiasm and
in December 1940, Gandhi suspended the movement. The campaign started
again in January 1941, this time, thousands of people joined and around 20
thousand people were arrested.On 3 December 1941, the Viceroy ordered the
acquittal of all the satyagrahis.
- The British feared the destabilizing of India
might encourage a Japanese invasion, and would reduce the number of men
who volunteered to fight the war. Japan in 1942 had overrun Malaya and was
into Burma; the threat of an invasion of India was real. London wanted the
cooperation and support of Indian political leaders in order to recruit
more Indians into the British Indian Army, which was fighting in the
Middle East theatre.
Cripps Mission:
- In March 1942, a mission headed by Stafford Cripps was sent to India with
constitutional proposals to seek Indian support for the war.
- Stafford Cripps was a left-wing Labourite, the
leader of the House of Commons and and government minister in the War
Cabinet of Prime Minister Winston Churchill. who had actively
supported the Indian national movement.
Why
Cripps Mission was sent:
- To secure full Indian cooperation and
support for their efforts in World War II, because of the reverses
suffered by Britain in South-East Asia, the Japanese threat to invade
India seemed real now ‘and Indian support became crucial.
- There was pressure on Britain from the Allies
(USA, USSR, and China) to seek Indian cooperation.
- Indian nationalists had agreed to support the
Allied cause if substantial power was transferred immediately and complete
independence given after the war.
- The
Congress was divided upon its response to India’s entry into World War II.
Angry over the decision made by the Viceroy, some Congress leaders
favoured launching a revolt against the British despite the gravity of the
war in Europe, which threatened Britain’s own freedom. Others, such as
Chakravarti Rajagopalachari, advocated offering an olive branch to the
British, supporting them in this crucial time in the hope that the gesture
would be reciprocated with independence after the war. The major leader,
Mohandas Gandhi, was opposed to Indian involvement in the war as he would
not morally endorse a war and also suspected British intentions, believing
that the British were not sincere about Indian aspirations for
independence. But Rajagopalachari, backed by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel,
Maulana Azad and Jawaharlal Nehru held talks with Cripps and offered full
support in return for immediate self-government, and eventual
independence.
- Jinnah,
the leader of the Muslim League, supported the war effort and condemned
the Congress policy. Insisting on a Pakistan, a separate Muslim state, he
resisted Congress’s calls for pan-Indian cooperation and immediate
independence
Main
Proposals:
- An Indian Union with a dominion status; would be set up; it would be
free to decide its relations with the Commonwealth and free to participate
in the United Nations and other international bodies.
- After the end of the war, a constituent assembly would be convened to frame
a new constitution. Members of this assembly would be partly elected by
the provincial assemblies through proportional representation and partly
nominated by the princes.
- The British Government would accept the new
constitution subject to two conditions: (i) any province not willing
to join the Union could have a separate constitution and form a separate
Union, and (ii) the new constitution- making body and the British
Government would negotiate a treaty to effect the transfer of power and to
safeguard racial and religious minorities.
- In the meantime, defence of India would remain
in British hands and the governor-general’s powers would remain intact.
Departures
from the Past and Implications:
- The making of the constitution was to be
solely in Indian hands now (and not “mainly” in Indian hands—as contained
in the August Offer).
- A concrete plan was provided for the
constituent assembly.
- Option was available to any province to have a
separate constitution—a blueprint for India’s partition.
- Free India could withdraw from the
Commonwealth.
- Indians were allowed a large share in the
administration in the interim period.
Why
Cripps Mission Failed:
(a)The Cripps Mission proposals failed to satisfy
Indian nationalists and turned out to be merely a propaganda device for US and
Chinese consumption. Cripps had designed the proposals himself, but they were
too radical for Churchill and the Viceroy, and too conservative for the
Indians; no middle way was found. Congress moved toward the Quit India movement
whereby it refused to cooperate in the war effort. Various parties and groups
had objections to the proposals on different points.
The
Congress’s objections:
- The
offer of dominion status instead of a provision for complete independence
- Representation
of the states by nominees and not by elected representatives
- Right
to provinces to secede as this went against the principle of national
unity
- Absence
of any plan for immediate transfer of power and absence of any real share
in defence; the governor- general’s supremacy had been retained, and the
demand for governor-general being only the constitutional head had not been
accepted.
Nehru and Maulana Azad
were the official negotiators for the Congress.
The
Muslim League’s objections:
- Criticised
the idea of a single Indian Union.
- Did
not like the machinery for the creation of a constituent assembly and the
procedure to decide on the accession of provinces to the Union.
- Thought
that the proposals denied to the Muslims the right to self-determination
and the creation of Pakistan.
Other
groups’ objections:
- The Liberals
considered the secession proposals to be against the unity and security of
India.
- The Hindu
Mahasabha criticised the basis of the right to secede.
- The depressed
classes thought that partition would leave them at the mercy of the
caste Hindus.
- The Sikhs
objected that partition would take away Punjab from them.
(b)The
explanation that the proposals were meant not to supersede the August Offer but
to clothe general provisions with precision put British intentions in doubt.
(c) There was confusion over what Cripps had been
authorised to offer India’s nationalist politicians by Churchill and Leo Amery
(His Majesty’s Secretary of State for India), and he also faced hostility from
the Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow.The incapacity of Cripps to go beyond the Draft
Declaration and the adoption of a rigid “take it or leave it” attitude added to
the deadlock. Cripps had earlier talked of “cabinet” and “national government”
but later he said that he had only meant an expansion of the executive council.
(d), in public, he failed to present any concrete
proposals for greater self-government in the short term, other than a vague
commitment to increase the number of Indian members of the Viceroy’s Executive
Council. Cripps spent much of his time in encouraging Congress leaders and
Jinnah to come to a common, public arrangement in support of the war and
government.
(d)The procedure of accession was not well-defined.
The decision on secession was to be taken by a resolution in the legislature by
a 60% majority. If less than 60% of” members supported it, the decision was to
be taken by a plebiscite of adult males of that province by a simple majority.
This scheme weighed against the Hindus in Punjab and Bengal if they wanted
accession to the Indian Union.
(e)It was not clear as to who would implement and
interpret the treaty effecting the transfer of power.
(f)Churchill
(the British prime minister), Amery (the secretary of state), Linlithgow (the
viceroy) and Ward (the commander-in-chief) consistently torpedoed Cripps’
efforts.
(g)Talks broke down on the question of the
viceroy’s veto.
(h)Gandhi described the scheme as “a post-dated cheque drawn on a crashing bank”;
Nehru pointed out that the “existing structure and autocratic powers would
remain and a few of us will become the viceroy’s liveried camp followers and
look after canteens and the like”.
(i)Stafford Cripps returned home leaving behind a
frustrated and embittered Indian people, who, though still sympathising with
the victims of Fascist aggression, felt that the existing situation in the
country had become intolerable and that the time had come for a final assault
on imperialism.
