02-Modren Indian History

8/10/2019 02-Modren Indian History

1/6


2/6


3/6

the nationalist cause. Instead of fighting for political and economic reasons, they fought them on

question of Caliph and holy places. They viewed the Balkan and the Tripoli wars as a conspiracy of

the west to weaken the muslim turks. This was a step back because it introduced the tendency of

looking @ purely politico-economic questions from religious viewpoint.

3. Congress too failed to check communalism at this stage because its policy was flawed. It followed a

policy of negotiating with Muslim communal leaders first in 1916 and then in 1919-20 instead of

expanding its base among Muslims. This had many negative effects - (a) It gave legitimacy to Muslim

communal leaders' claims of 'representing Muslims'. (b) It made life tough for Muslim leaders insideCongress as they lost the ground of their existence to the communal leaders. (c) It accepted the notion

that there were things such as 'Muslim interests' and 'Hindu interests'.

4. Hindu communalism also began to grow and it was used as a means of justification by Muslim

communalism. Chicken and egg problem. Both used each other to justify that the interests of two

communities were divergent. Hindu Mahasabha was founded in 1915 and RSS in 1925.

There was a 'crisis of unity' after the NCM.

1. Communal riots broke out after the end of the khilafat and the NCM. Issues like cow and music

before the mosque became the issues of the riots. The 1926 elections were fought openly on

communal issues. There was not a single muslim congress candidate in Bengal. Elsewhere all congress

muslim candidates lost. The majority of elected congressmen were pro hindu sympathizers. The

uncomfortable association of the local congress leaders with hindu mahasabha also complicated the

situation. Naturally in such situation communal institutions of both communities gained following. Even

Dr. Kitchlew for whom Jalliawalah happened became a hard core communalist. Shaukat Ali in 1929

observed that congress had become a hindu organization.

2. Within ML as well there were issues between the supporters of communal electorates and the

opposers.

Additional factors

1. Swadesi & Boycott Movements: These were immensely powerful movements and to counter this,

government had to form ML and encourage separatist elements.

2. Congress' Policy: It was bound to fail as - (a) By negotiating with communal leaders, Congress gave

them political space and legitimacy. (b) It accepted notions of 'communal interests'. (c) It made life

difficult for secular Muslim leaders. (d) When one set of demands were fulfilled, other more radical

communal demands came up - either from new leaders or from the same ones. This led to

progressively increasing communalism and even the liberal communalists were forced to become

radical to save their careers.

Phase 3: Interests are conflicting and incompatible (1937 onwards)

Nature & Character

1. Idea of a separate state was propounded in 1916 by Abdul Sattar while participating in 2nd Comintern

@ Moscow. In 1924, Lala Lajpat Rai echoed separate state theory. In 1930, @ Allahabad session of

ML, Mohd. Iqbal proposed a separate state in NW parts of the country. In 1933, Rahmat Ali

proposed Pakistan. It was @ Karachi meeting of the Sind branch of ML presided over by Jinnah that

a resolution was passed which mentioned the need for 'political self determination of the 2 nations' andasked ML to think of appropriate measures to realize it. This was the 1st official declaration of the 2

nation theory by ML. Some commies however argued that this was not separation yet and it merely

signified muslims becoming a 'nation' from a 'minority' and thus any development in India must take

consent of the muslim nation as well.


4/6

2. But still none of the important leaders of ML supported the 2 nation theory including Jinnah. Only after

ML lost the 1937 elections and faced an existential threat that it began to cry 'Islam in danger' and

'Pakistan'.

3. The 1937 elections were fought by ML largely on a liberal agenda which resembled INC's. On the

other hand the Krishak Praja Party of Fazlul Haq in Bengal fought the election on class issues by

rallying lower class muslims and low caste hindu peasants. In Punjab Sikandar Hayat too formed a

coalition of Hindu and Muslim upper peasant elements and won. ML had no issue left since its demand

for communal electorates had been fulfilled. So it merely wanted more reservations and to protect'Muslim interests'. In the elections, it fared badly. It got only 4.4% of the Muslim votes and only

110/485 seats reserved for Muslims. Congress ditched ML.

4. After the defeat and facing existential threat, it took resort to extremism. It came up with a series of

fabricated reports telling tales of oppressions of Muslims in INC ruled states and took resort to

communal riots. Of course, policy of INC to tackle communalism also has to be blamed since it never

made a serious effort to reach out to Muslim masses. It always followed a policy of negotiating with

communal Muslim leaders. This not only gave these leaders legitimacy but also discouraged Muslim

leaders inside Congress.

5. Communalism now became increasingly radical, mass based and violent. The reactionary elements inthe society like zamindars increasingly turned to communalism for the defense of their interests.

Additional Factors

1. Existential threat to reactionary elements: The CDM and Congress governments had considerably

strengthened INM and now the zamindars couldn't justify defending their interests plainly. So they took

recourse to communalism to protect their interests.

2. Exhaustion of other sources of division: Other division lines like caste, region, leftist-rightist ideology

had been defeated by the INM. So took gave their full support to communalism.

3. Nature of communalism itself and Congress' mistakes: Appeasement of communalism leads to itsradicalization inevitably. By the Communal Award of 1932 and GoI Act of 1935 almost all major

demands of communalists had been accepted. So they resorted to something more radical to save their

careers. Congress was finally realizing its mistake and pushing out communalists and also launching a

mass contact program among Muslims under JLN but it was already too late.

Logic of communalism - Jinnah a case study

Nationalist --> Communal Nationalist --> Liberal Communalist --> Radical Communalist.

1. Jinnah was one of the most secular Muslim leaders earlier on. His first step towards communalism was

taken perhaps unintentionally when he entered legislature on a Muslim electorate seat. Then in 1913

he joined Muslim league and became a communal nationalist. He still opposed communal electorates

but increasingly spoke on behalf of 'Muslim interests'.

2. In 1919-20 when Congress took a turn towards mass movements, liberals like Jinnah faced the threat

of political end. So he turned to communal politics and became a liberal communalist. He revived ML

in 1924. He raised demands on 'protecting Muslim interests' and the strategy worked well until CDM.

3. In this phase he tried to develop Muslims into vote banks i.e. they should organize themselves as one

unit and press for their demands @ all forums. Gradually he kept on surrendering to more radical

demands. By 1937 elections, all his demands were fulfilled and he fought on a liberal ideology.

4. Facing existential threat after the elections, he unleashed Pakistan. In Hindus, communal leaders likeMadan Mohan Malviya retired from active politics after 1937 but their place was taken over by fascist

communalists like Gowalikar.

5. Congress leaders couldn't have negotiated with him because he insisted that Congress declared itself a


5/6

Hindu organization.

Hindu Mahasabha

1. In 1909, Punjab Hindu Sabha was founded and its leaders focused their anger on Congress for

appeasing Muslims and sacrificing 'Hindu interests'.

2. In 1915, HM was founded under the leadership of Maharaja of Kasimbazar.

3. By 1937, its place was taken over by RSS and they evens supported fascist Germany and Italy.

Independence

Post-War Scenario in India

1. legitimacy was gone. When the leaders came out of the jail they expected to find demoralized

people. But they found jubilated masses. Freedom was in the air and everybody could sense it.

2. Labor party had come to power in . It wanted to resolve the issue at the earliest so ban on Congress

was revoked, elections were held and Congress was invited for the talks. The most significant part of

the elections was that it mobilized people against - the elections were to prove end of legitimacy in

India. Nationalist issues were @ the forefront in the campaigning. Main issues were reopening cases ofrepressions during QIM and enquiries, INA trials.

Why there was a dissent in pillars of rule - bureaucracy, police and military

1. QIM had completely undermined the legitimacy. Post war international scenario, government and

strength of nationalist movement had convinced days of rule in India were limited and power would

go in the hands of Congress. So bureaucracy chose to support their new masters.

2. The elections of 1945 were fought on the issues of reopening cases of official excesses during QIM!

Nothing can be worse for the morale of bureaucracy. The government failed to check such speeches

of enquiries.

3. INA trials brought out the sympathies of military with INA men in open. Military personnel and

bureaucrats openly took part in the meetings in support of INA men and even donated.

Debate: Why did finally quit? Why did Congress accept partition?

(a) Colonial version

1. It was fulfillment of long term promise of granting India self-government.

2. Partition was unfortunate and happened because the 2 communities failed to arrive at any mutually

acceptable conclusion on how to transfer power.

(b) Communist version

1. left India because of the uprisings and radical action in 1945-46.

2. Bourgeoisie Congress frightened of a mass uprising struck a deal with and agreed to partition to grab

power quickly.

(c) Nationalist version

1. Since the beginning Congress had a 2 fold task - (a) to mobilize various communities against the

colonial rule and to exert pressure on . (b) to unite all communities sufficiently into a nation. While it

succeeded in the first one and united them sufficiently to exert pressure on , they failed in the latter

task and couldn't weld them into a nation.

2. Prove that the reforms of 1909, 1919, 1935 were not a means of delegation of power to Indians with


6/6

the objective of self government but was to maintain the essentials of rule in India. Even in 1950s the

were thinking of means to consolidate their hold over other colonies in Africa and Asia.

3. The growing pitch of nationalism and defiant mood in the country had made rule almost impossible

by the end. Even the strongholds of rule - the loyalists, the bureaucracy and the military were

flinching. The beliefs that were mai baaps of India and they were invincible were gone.

4. had been weakened considerably and the cold war international politics couldn't give them a chance

to continue their rule.

5. were losing the economic control of India. From 30s, London had little control over the economicpolicies of GoI, protective tariffs had been imposed, India became a creditor from a debtor to (

owed India 1.3 bio now), had to pay for the use of Indian army now, empire in other parts of the

world was shaky so strategic defence argument also didn't work.India was no longer her imperial

asset, rather had become a source of weakness. And this situation arose due to strength of the

nationalist movement and not by any designs. Even though Labor party had Indian independence on

its manifesto since 1935, after coming to the power they turned out to be remarkably unradical in their

approach. But India by now was beyond manageable for .

6. strategy was that of force and conciliation i.e. carrot and stick. After Cripps mission and Quit India,

there was no room for further reforms and only thing they could negotiate was on how to transfer thepower. A policy of suppression couldn't have been carried on for perpetuity.

7. Congress accepted partition because it had failed and had to accept what people wanted. The interim

government had failed. Direct Action and communal riots could be countered only by an early transfer

of full power. Also the balkanization of the country had to be prevented. Gandhiji in his prayer meeting

said, "you ask me why I accepted partition. I accepted it because you wanted it."

Whatever pre war tendencies may have existed, the pattern of post war decolonialisation was

impacted by the war.

1. The QIM and its brutal repression ruptured the relationship between the and the people and layhollow their claim of being mai baaps. The Bengal famine, the war time food security, INA question

had eroded the moral legitimacy of the Raj.

2. Then there were international realities of cold war. Also were losing the economic control of India.

Documents

02-Modren Indian History