Paper 2›Modern India›Politics of Separatism & Partition

Politics of Separatism and Partition

Round Table Conference, Gandhi-Irwin Pact, Communal Award Contents Simon Commission and anti-Simon agitation (1927-28)........................................................................2 Nehru Committee Report.......................................................................................................................3 Response of different Political Parties................................................................................................4 Jinnah's fourteen point demand.........................................................................................................4 Purna Swaraj Resolution, 1929...............................................................................................................4 Significance.........................................................................................................................................5 Practice Question................................................................................................................................6 Q. Discuss the circumstances behind the Purna Swaraj resolution. What was its significance to the national struggle?.....................................................................................................................6 Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-31) (1932-34)...............................................................................8 Important Developments and programmes within the Civil Disobedience movement.....................9 Salient features of the movement....................................................................................................10 First Round Table Conference...............................................................................................................11 Practice Question..............................................................................................................................12 Q. The mechanism of the round table conferences was designed to fail. Critically evaluate......12 Gandhi-Irwin Pact (1931)......................................................................................................................13 Significance of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact...............................................................................................13 Practice Question..............................................................................................................................14 Q. Discuss the circumstances leading upto the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. What was its significance for the national struggle?...................................................................................................................14 Karachi session, 1931........................................................................................................................15 Significance of Karachi resolutions ...............................................................................................16 Aftermath..............................................................................................................................................16 Mc Donald Award (1932)/ Communal Award.......................................................................................17 Gandhi's Response............................................................................................................................17 Poona Pact........................................................................................................................................17 Significance.......................................................................................................................................18

Simon Commission and anti-Simon agitation (1927-28)

The conservative government of Britain set up the Indian Statutory Commission (Statutory Commission) in November, 1927 to review the working of the Montford reforms.

The Montford reforms had provided for the appointment of such a commission after ten years of its operation.

However, the conservatives were expected to lose the upcoming elections of January, 1928, they did not want to leave the task of setting up such an important commission in the "irresponsible liberal hands".

Thus, the Commission had an important mandate-

To determine whether to extend, restrict or modify the scope of responsible government of India.

To report whether the relationship between British India and the Princely states needs to be altered.

As soon as the news of the appointment of this commission reached India, there was a huge outcry since it was an All-White Commission as no Indian had been considered capable enough to determine India's political future.

Since its arrival in India in early 1928, the commission was met with black flag agitations, bonfires of British cloth, massive demonstrations and chants of Simon Go back!

Almost all political parties including the Congress, Swaraj party, Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League boycotted it exhibiting remarkable political unity.

The anti-Simon agitation also spread to the princely states with the emergence of the Praja Mandal movement (State Peoples' Movements). Congress, especially Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru played a leading role in spreading nationalist consciousness among masses of the princely states.

However, some leaders and parties did not boycott the Simon Commission and raised significant demands

Dr Ambedkar demanded separate electorates for the depressed classes.
The Justice Party demanded reservations for non-Brahmins of the Madras constituency in government services, education and legislative representation.

The Unionist Party of Punjab demanded greater protections for landowners and peasants.

Some Muslim leaders demanded the creation of a Muslim majority province by separating the Sindhi speaking areas of the Bombay Presidency.

Nevertheless, the anti-Simon agitation revived the era of mass anti-colonial protests. The British felt deeply embarrassed by the popularity of the anti-Simon agitation.

Thus, they began brutally suppressing the agitation using lathicharge, mass arrests and preventive detention.

Lala Lajpat Rai was grievously injured in a Police lathicharge while leading a demonstration at Lahore and passed away a few days later.

The mood of the masses became radical and the Simon Commission was forced to retire.

In 1929, Bhagat Singh and his comrades revenged Lala Lajpat Rai by assassinating JB Saunders who they mistakenly believed was responsible for Lala Lajpat Rai's death.

In the meanwhile, the government became increasingly frustrated and began searching for a way out to destroy national unity. Nehru Committee Report

The Secretary of State for India, Lord Birkenhead became increasingly frustrated by the boycott of the Simon Commission, challenged Indians to prepare their own draft of

Constitutional reforms. If the consensus of all political parties emerged, the British would implement it without a delay.

In response, the Indian parties held three All Party conferences at Delhi, Bombay, Lucknow after which committee chaired by Motilal Nehru was appointed to prepare this draft.

The Nehru Committee consisted of several jurists and leaders such as SC Bose, Ali Imam, MR Jayakar, and Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru among others.

In September, 1928, the Nehru committee submitted its draft in the form of a report with the following recommendations and demands-

Dominion status within the British Empire
Secularism i.e. India would not have any state religion and its people would enjoy the freedom of religion.

Universal Adult Franchise i.e. everyone above the age of 21 years would have the right to vote irrespective of their socio-economic status.

Abolition of Separate electorates
Reservation of Muslims wherever they were in minority.
Fundamental rights for all Indians including the Right to Equality for both men and women.

Federal polity with a strong centre.

Response of different Political Parties Congress- It accepted all the recommendations of the Nehru report.

Young leaders within the Congress accepted the reports partially. Instead of Dominion status, they wanted complete independence.

Hindu Mahasabha- It rejected the report on the ground that it provided reservation to Muslims.

Muslim League- It rejected with Jinnah arguing that it did not have sufficient protection for Muslim interests and in response raised his famous fourteen point demand program.

Jinnah's fourteen point demand

In response to the Nehru report, Jinnah raised fourteen demands in the interest of Indian Muslims. Of these, there were five key demands-

Separate electorates should continue till Universal Adult Franchise is introduced.
Reservation for Muslims in proportion to their population.
One-third seats in the Central Legislative Assembly to be reserved for Muslims.
Minority veto.
Federal polity with a weak centre.

However, all these demands were rejected by the Congress and no compromise could be reached. This represented the first major breach between the Congress and Muslim League.

While many of these demands had been acceptable to Congress under the Lucknow Pact (1916), the growth of populism and right wing ideology among the Congress workers prevented any compromise.

Purna Swaraj Resolution, 1929

The younger Congressmen such as SC Bose and Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru were not satisfied with the demand of dominion status rather they wanted complete independence.

The demand of complete independence was not new. Within the national movement, it had first been raised by Aurobindo Ghosh during the Swadesh movement. Later, Hasrat

Mohani had also interpreted Swaraj means complete independence from British rule during the non-cooperation movement.

However, this demand for complete independence had not emerged as the primary objective of the national movement as a whole.

The Nehru report had asked for dominion status within British rule.
Under pressure from the younger nationalists, the Congress while endorsing the Nehru report in its Calcutta session of 1928 gave a one year deadline to the government to

implement it. Failing this, the Congress would launch mass movement to attain Purna Swaraj i.e. complete independence.

Citing lack of consensus among the Indian political parties, the government ignored the Nehru report.

In the Lahore session, 1929, Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru was elected as President and he introduced the Purna Swaraj resolution. For the first time, the Congress officially raised

the demand of complete independence and authorized Mahatma Gandhi to launch the mass movement to achieve it.

Significance

For the first time, demand of complete independence was raised by the Congress. This would remain the position of the Congress till the attainment of the independence. As

such, during the 1940 s, the Congress would reject several offers of dominion status by the British.

Following the Purna Swaraj resolution, the national struggle became even more intense than earlier. It represented the emergence of a higher degree of radicalism that would

result in more frequent, more direct confrontations between the nationalists and the British.

The Purna Swaraj demand also signaled a shift within the leadership of the Congress. The campaign for Purna Swaraj demand had been championed by the younger leaders namely SC Bose and Pt Nehru. Slowly but surely it began eclipsing the more senior leaders.

The shift in leadership also symbolized shift in the ideological position of the Congress.

With the rise of the younger leaders, the socialist ideology became increasingly prominent within the Congress. SC Bose and Jawahar Lal Nehru would all for structural reforms in the living and working conditions of the workers and peasants. This presented a challenge to the Gandhian ideal of trusteeship and class cooperation. As the socialist ideology matured, the Congress witnessed the rise of the left within itself in the form of the Congress Socialist party (1934).

The internal politics of the Congress would also witness major upheavals as a result of the growing ideological divide within it. The most visible manifestation of this was the post- CDM strategic debate within the Congress prompting Mahatma Gandhi to resign from the Congress in 1934.

As the Congress began leaning towards the left, it adopted populist position on several social and economic issues resulting in higher mass participation including the

enthusiastic support of the workers' movement. This was reflected in the growth of Trade Union movement and Kisan Sabha movement during the 1930 s.

One aspect of the Congress' increasingly popular agenda was to clearly define what independence would look like for the masses.

As such, in its special session at Karachi i.e. 1931, the Congress adopted two landmark resolutions namely resolution on fundamental rights and the resolution on a New Economic Programme.

These resolutions set the Congress towards the path of an egalitarian, inclusive, progressive and democratic society.

The growing influence of the socialist ideology was also visible during the Civil Disobedience movement. Unlike the non-cooperation movement where Mahatma Gandhi had tried to avoid direct confrontation between the classes, thus withdrawing it.

In CDM, once a radical peasant movement against Zamindars emerged, he began a no

rent campaign within the Civil Disobedience movement himself.

On the whole, the Purna Swaraj resolution represented the coming of age of Indian nationalism.

It was the logical conclusion of the evolving concept of Swaraj.
It represented the emergence of a polyphonic national movement which would be carried out in accordance with a consensus among different ideologies rather than a single dominant ideology or leader.

Practice Question Q. Discuss the circumstances behind the Purna Swaraj resolution. What was its significance to the national struggle?

Purna Swaraj resolution was passed in Lahore session of the Congress (1929) presided over by Jawahar Lal Nehru. It is symbolic of maturity and intensification of Indian nationalism which did not seem in the mood of compromise after this.

Circumstances behind the Purna Swaraj resolution

Swadeshi movement and then Home Rule League had created a consciousness for self- rule but it had not yet reached a mutual consensus regarding the extent of the Swaraj.

Act of 1919 further proved the malicious intentions of British. To remedy this, government set up an 'All-White' Simon Commission which faced huge political agitations by all the parties in India.

Amidst this political mood, Lord Birkenhead (Secretary of State for India) challenged Indian parties to form a common constitution.

All Party conferences were organized but the deal broke out because of Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha. Nonetheless, a committee headed by Motilal Nehru submitted its report with the demand of 'dominion status'.

However, by now, the younger leaders such as SC Bose and Jawahar Lal Nehru were not ready to accept anything less than the complete independence.

Under their pressure, Congress (especially Mahatma Gandhi) gave an ultimatum of one year to the government to accept the demands of the Motilal Nehru report; else

Congress would launch a mass struggle to attain Purna Swaraj.

However, government was emboldened by the disunity of Indians and did not realize the importance of the demand at that time.

Finally, at Lahore session in 1929 under the Presidency of Jawahar Lal Nehru, Congress gave the call for Purna Swaraj i.e. complete independence.

Significance of the Purna Swaraj resolution

For the first time, demand for complete independence was made which intensified the national struggle.

The leadership of the Congress sifted to younger leaders.
Due to entry of young leaders, further radicalisation of the movement took place as they were influenced by the left ideology.

Thus, inclination towards socialism was natural, further increasing the reach of the Congress to Kisan sabhas and workers' unions. Congress Socialist Party was formed in 1934 within the Congress umbrella.

Moreover, in Karachi session (1931) under Sardar Patel, resolution for New Economic Programme and the Fundamental rights was passed showing the change in political understanding of the nationalists.

However, Mahatma Gandhi resigned from the Congress in 1934 amid increasing ideological confrontation in the post-CDM atmosphere.

Therefore, this intensification and maturity of Indian national struggle after the Purna Swaraj resolution did not allow Congress to compromise for anything less ultimately building pressure on the British to leave India.

Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-31)

(1932-34)

The circumstances for Civil Disobedience Movement were prepared by the series of developments that had taken place within the national struggle since the appointment of the Simon Commission.

The government rejected the Nehru Report prompting the Congress to adopt the Purna

Swaraj resolution. Following this, Congress handed over the leadership of the nationalist movement to Mahatma Gandhi authorizing him to begin a programme of mass civil disobedience to attain Purna Swaraj.

Mahatma Gandhi began by presenting a set of 11 demands before the government.

Some of the major demands included

Abolition of Salt tax
Abolition of liquor and other intoxicants
The release of political prisoners
Return of confiscated property
Inquiry into police atrocities
Reduction of land revenue
Lifting the prohibition on the nationalist literature
Strengthening the Indian currency
Protecting Indian industries against foreign competition

A closer observation of these demands has allowed historians to categorise them into three classes-

Genera interest demands
Peasant demands
Bourgeois demands

This clearly demonstrates Mahatma Gandhi's intention to enlist the support of each section of the population for the upcoming civil disobedience movement.

He knew that the government would not accept these demands, thus he was raising them to clarify the Congress' position to the masses.

At the same time, he wanted to secure the moral high ground for the nationalists since this forewarning was sufficient to preempt any accusations by the British underhandedness by Indians.

Mahatma Gandhi followed this by launching the civil disobedience movement when the government ignored these demands.

Important Developments and programmes within the Civil Disobedience movement

12 th March, 1930- The movement began with the Dandi March as Mahatma Gandhi led a band of 78 Satyagrahis from his ashram at Sabarmati to Dandi where he reached on the

6 th April with thousands of followers. At Dandi, he broke the salt law by picking up salt from the beaches.

Similar salt marches or salt Satyagrahas were organized in other coastal areas including-

Kerala - K. Kelappan - Calicut to Pazhyannur
Tamil Nadu - C. Rajagopalachari - Thiruchirapalli to Vedaranyam
Eastern India - Satyagrahis - Sylhet to Noakhali

Similarly, salt agitations were organized around major salt refining factories such as-

Vadala (Bombay)
Sainiktala (Karnataka)
Dharasana Salt works (Gujarat)

In the North-West Frontier Province, the Civil Disobedience Movement took the shape of a massive protest movement against British rule in favour of a Pashtun homeland and unity with the rest of India.

The movement was led by Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan who through his Khuda-i-

Khidmadgar organisation also known as the 'Red Shirts' and his weekly Pushto magazine 'Pakhtoon' organized massive demonstrations in cities such as Peshawar against British rule in violation of Unlawful Assembly Prevention Law.

A major shock was received by the British when Indian sepoys refused to fire on the unarmed protesters.

United Provinces- the CDM took the form of powerful no-revenue campaign by the peasants.

Since the government had banned the publication of nationalist material, mass mobilization was conducted through publication of Patrikas (illegal news sheets), Prabhatpheris, Manjari senas and Vanar senas.

Eastern India- CDM took the shape of a no-rent and no-revenue campaign that targeted both the British as well as the Zamindars.

Additionally, this region also witnessed powerful anti-Union board tax and anti- Chowkidari tax campaigns.

Central India and Karnataka- here, the movement brought about powerful forest agitations which both tribals and non-tribals violated forest laws.

North East India- Movement took the shape of a popular protest against British rule over the attainment of independence in north east.

Rani Gaidinliu, a 13 year old queen from Manipur emerged as the face of the movement for a separate homeland for the Nagas and the Manipuris.

Salient features of the movement

Movement was a true All India Gandhian Movement. It witnessed the participation of several sections in large numbers across various regions including cities and villages.

Mahatma Gandhi played an instrumental role in organizing the movement and remained in supreme control from its beginning to the end.

At the same time, the rising influence of Socialism was visible within the movement especially in the radical no-rent campaign of peasants and tribals against Zamindars.

Hindu-Muslim unity was missing in the CDM and Muslim participation remained low except for the NWFP.

While the Civil Disobedience movement witnessed a leftward shift, it was unable to attract the workers in large numbers. This was because left within the Congress was still

in the early stages of emergence and under Mahatma Gandhi Congress relied heavily on the support of industrialists which made the workers suspicious.

The movement remained peaceful from beginning to the end with the nationalists displaying remarkable courage, patience and restraint. This indicates that the masses had fully accepted the Gandhian method of non-violent Satyagraha.

Despite this, the British responded with brutal and violent suppression. Civil liberties were suspended with restrictions on speech, expression, movement, assembly and association. The Police was given a free hand to violently suppress and disperse peaceful marches, salt agitations, pickets and satyagrahas through lathicharges, mass arrests and preventive detention.

The brutal British repression invited International attention. For the first time, the national struggle received the sympathy and goodwill of the international community.

British regime was criticized and condemned by the liberal western democracies and the Soviets alike. Britain, therefore, came under increasing international pressure to introduce liberal reforms.

The mood of the Congress appeared far more radical as compared to earlier. It even boycotted the Round Table conference forcing the government to come to the negotiating table resulting in the Gandhi-Irwin Pact.

At the same time, cracks had started emerging within the movement. Traders and industrialists were the first to show the signs of fatigue. They were the first to feel the

effects of boycotting foreign goods and foreign yarn thus pressurizing the Congress to reach an agreement with the government. This was another factor behind the Gandhi-

Irwin Pact.

First Round Table Conference

British government organized a series of three Round table conferences at London with the different Indian political stakeholders to discuss findings of the Simon Commission to formulate framework for the new constitutional machinery to govern India.

The Congress boycotted the First Round Table conference (1930) since the Civil disobedience movement was going on.

However, other political parties attended.

The Muslim League represented by Muhammad Ali Jinnah demanded the continuation of separate electorates and the creation of new Muslim majority province such as Sindh.

The Hindu Mahasabha represented by MR Jayakar demanded the abolition of separate electorates and reservation given to minorities. Additionally, they demanded the creation of an All India Federation with the Princely states.

The Depressed classes represented by Dr Ambedkar demanded minority status for the dalits and separate electorates as well.

Liberals represented by Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru demanded greater degree responsible government within British rule.

The Princely states were represented by their Diwans and agents demanded continuation of the status quo. They opposed the idea of the compulsory incorporation of princely states to any All India Federation and demanded that their participation must be on a voluntary basis.

The position of these parties remained unchanged throughout all the round table conferences.

The Congress however, boycotted the first as well as third round table conference. However, it did attend the second round table conference following the Gandhi-Irwin Pact but realizing that the government was not serious about the Indian political opinion and withdrew from it.

The round table conferences were never actually meant to yield any meaningful results.

The British were simply conducting them as a hollow media event to show the Indian people and the international community that Indians were being given a fair opportunity to determine their political future.

The real intention behind these conferences was to exploit the differences between the different political parties to maintain the status quo and preserve autocratic rule in India.

The British strategy from the very beginning was to establish parity between the Congress and the other parties in order to undermine Congress and Indian nationalism.

Thus, the round table conferences were bound to fail.

Practice Question Q. The mechanism of the round table conferences was designed to fail.

Critically evaluate.

Three Round Table Conferences were held between 1930 and 1932 to discuss the recommendations of Simon Commission and break the political deadlock that was created in the aftermath of anti-Simon agitation.

However, its mechanism was designed to fail because-

British Government's efforts to give parity to other parties as equal to Congress were in itself an attempt to apply the policy of 'divide and rule' and weaken the voice of the Congress.

All the parties such as Muslim League, Hindu Mahasabha and princely states represented sectarian and narrow interests which were contradictory to national interests promoted by Congress.

British attempted to legitimize their interests in order to use them as a shield against any accusation of autocracy.

Anti-Simon agitation and later Civil Disobedience Movement attracted global attention which brought huge criticism to British. Thus, Round Table Conferences are even

considered as the hollow media event to create an impression of British efforts for the well-being of Indians.

Thirdly, the genesis of the report itself lied in a commission which was full of racial superiority complex i.e. Simon Commission. Absence of Indian members from a discussion on their own interests itself shows lack of seriousness.

Fourthly, during First Round Table Conference, Congress, despite being the largest organisation, did not participate since Civil Disobedience movement was going on.

Absence of Congress suggests absence of the largest platform created for representation of Indian interests but the conference still continued thus showing British apathy for the cause.

The Round Table Conferences proved the futility of any positive or progressive discussions with the British and the Congress treaded cautiously in any such future negotiations. It only convinced nationalists to continue the struggle against the Colonial autocracy.

Gandhi-Irwin Pact (1931)

By early 1931, Congress had been facing pressure from industrialists. They wanted the Civil disobedience movement to be suspended due to building financial strain.

On the other hand, the government was also desperate for a compromise since the absence of the Congress from the First Round Table Conference had been big source of embarrassment as the process of constitutional reforms had been halted.

On 5 th March, 1931, Mahatma Gandhi was invited by Governor General Irwin for an open dialogue resulting in the signing of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact.

The two sides agreed that-

Civil disobedience movement would be suspended.
The Congress would attend Second Round Table conference.
The salt law was amended. The production of salt for private consumption would not require a license.

The government would release all political prisoners.
Private property that had been confiscated had to be returned.
The peaceful picketing of shops selling liquor was allowed. Significance of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact

It represented the first instance in which Indians had been treated as equals by the

British. Mahatma Gandhi was the first Indian to be invited for the direct dialogue with the Governor General. This was proof of the growing popularity of the Congress movement and Gandhi's stature as India's national leader. The government was not in a position to neglect the Congress and its participation in the round table conference was considered essential for its success.

The Congress had agreed to any compromise with the government primarily under the pressure of powerful business groups. This proves that despite the growth of the

socialist ideology, the industrialists remained an important pressure group. Further, it also showcases the close relationship between the industrialists and Mahatma Gandhi.

This also shows that the Congress movement could not be sustained on popularity alone. In fact, it was a grand collaborative exercise between different interest groups.

The Gandhi-Irwin Pact was negotiated on the basis of Mahatma Gandhi's 11 point demand which he had raised as a prelude to the Civil disobedience. The government had to fulfill some of these promises in order to conclude the pact-

This proves Mahatma Gandhi's uncanny ability to tackle the British and also validated his Satyagraha strategy once again. Also it proved the Congress right for entrusting Mahatma Gandhi with the leadership of the movement.

While the Gandhi-Irwin Pact symbolized a major achievement, many of Mahatma Gandhi's demands remained unfulfilled.

The pact offered no protection to Indian industries. There was no discussion on strengthening the Rupee against pound.

Salt tax remained in place.
There was no prohibition on intoxicants.
No discussion was started on the issue of land revenue. The government refused to even entertain the question of inquiry into police brutalities.

Therefore, while the government had been successfully brought to the negotiating table, weaknesses within the own movement of the Congress prevented substantial progress.

This had exposed weaknesses in the Gandhian strategy creating space for the further growth of socialism within the national movement.

Practice Question Q. Discuss the circumstances leading upto the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. What was its significance for the national struggle?

Gandhi-Irwin Pact (1931), signed between Mahatma Gandhi and Viceroy Irwin, was a major development which resulted in the suspension of Civil disobedience movement and facilitated Congress' participation in the round table conference.

Circumstances leading upto the Gandhi-Irwin Pact were-

Gandhi had experienced earlier as well that a popular mass movement cannot be continued for a very long time.

Secondly, by this time, industrialists were also creating pressure on the Congress to suspend the movement due to mounting financial stress.

Thirdly, sporadic incidents of violence had started occurring in different parts of the country.

Fourthly, British had also realised the futility of Round Table conference in absence of the Congress.

They were also facing pressure from the international community regarding their misgovernance in the country.

Significance of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact for national struggle

It was the first time when British were treating Indians as equals. Gandhi's meeting with Governor General and even the British Emperor shows his stature.

Although Congress was tilting towards socialism, impact of business interests on Gandhian movement cannot be denied. This also shows the broad class collaboration under Gandhi's leadership.

The negotiations were finalized on Gandhi's 11 point programmes and several of his demands such as freeing political prisoners etc. were accepted.

However, the British upper hand in the negotiations can be gauged from the fact that several important demands remained unfulfilled.

Gandhi-Irwin Pact clearly demonstrated the Congress as the national organisation and Gandhi as its undisputed leader. This allowed the nationalist to leap forward in the coming years.

Karachi session, 1931

The Gandhi-Irwin Pact prepared the occasion for the Congress to organise a special session and to ratify it. It was held in Karachi in April, 1931 with Sardar Patel as President.

At this session, following developments took place-

Congress ratified Gandhi-Irwin Pact.
It agreed to participate in second Round Table Conference and nominated Mahatma Gandhi as its sole representative.

The demand for Purna Swaraj was reiterated.
Pt Nehru introduced two historical resolutions namely- fundamental rights resolution and New Economic Programme Resolution and clearly defined what Swaraj would mean to the masses for the first time.

Fundamental rights resolution-

Right to freedom of speech, expression, movement, assembly and association
Right to Equality including equal rights for both men and women
Universal Adult Franchise
Protection of the cultural rights of minorities
Right to free and compulsory primary education

Resolution on New Economic Policy-

Relief from agrarian debt
Reduction in land revenue
Tenancy reform including security of tenure for peasants
Better working conditions and higher wages for workers in industry
The right of peasants and workers to form Unions and bargain collectively.

Significance of Karachi resolutions

With these resolutions, the Congress fully committed itself to the socialist objective of creating to prepare an equal society.

The Congress would follow this up by supporting trade union movements and the Kisan Sabhas. This would also result in the introduction of economic planning in New Economic Plan of 1938 and Bombay Plan of 1944.

These resolutions especially the one on fundamental rights prepared the platform for advocacy towards a free, open, democratic and secular society.

Education became the motto for development and progress and emerged as the great equalizer.

Further, the Congress also prepared a pathway towards a rational society that would overcome obstacles and make decisions collectively.

These resolutions clearly defined what independence would mean for the masses for the first time.

It would not simply be political independence from foreign rule. Instead, the underprivileged sections would also be liberated from their historical bondage with social and economic justice.

These resolutions while signaling a major shift did not signify complete break from the past. Instead, Congress built upon the legacy of the Nehru report by endorsing many of its recommendations.

Aftermath

In accordance with the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, Mahatma Gandhi represented the Congress at the Second Round Table Conference. This round of talks ended in a deadlock as no

consensus could be created on important issues such as separate electorates, reservation of minorities, protection for the depressed classes, the scope of responsible government and the participation of princely states in an All India federation.

The government blamed Indians for being unable to reach a consensus while the Congress blamed the government for deliberately derailing the negotiations.

Therefore, the Second Round Table Conference also ended in failure.
Mahatma Gandhi came back to India and the Civil Disobedience movement resumed. However, the earlier energy could not be revived and popular response remained low.

On the other hand, the government tried to further divide the Indian nationalists with the Mc Donald Award.

Mc Donald Award (1932)/ Communal Award

Dr Ambedkar had been demanding separate electorates for the depressed classes ever since the Simon Commission's visit to India. He had reiterated this demand in all the Round Table Conferences.

He argued that the depressed classes or untouchables were not considered part of the Hindu four-fold Varna system.

Therefore, they were not actually Hindu. Rather, they constituted a religious minority outside Hinduism.

As such, the principle of minority reservation in electoral processes could be applied to them as well.

Other religious minorities such as Muslims, Sikhs, and Anglo-Indians had been granted separate electorate. Thus, the depressed classes must be granted the same.

Frustrated by failure of the Round Table Conferences and the resumption of the Civil disobedience movement, the British government reverted to its tried and tested policy of divide and rule.

In 1932, the British Prime Minister Ramsay Mc Donald announced his infamous Communal award recognizing India's depressed classes as a religious minority and granted separate electorates for them.

Gandhi's Response

At the time of this award Mahatma Gandhi was imprisoned at Yerwada jail in Poona. He was deeply alarmed by this announcement and decided to go on a fast unto death.

He was opposed to the award for following reasons-

It would have permanently fractured Indian society and would have weakened national movement as a whole by dividing Indians

It would have institutionalised untouchability. It would have been social evil that would have given constitutional recognition and would have furthered the division between upper class and depressed class. Its impact would have been similar to the impact of separate electorates on Muslims.

Poona Pact

Dr Ambedkar visited Mahatma Gandhi on the 21 st day of his fast and they agreed that

Depressed classes would not have separate electorates
They would have joint electorate with reservation that would be double of what they already enjoyed. Following this, pact was signed by Dr Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi representing the depressed classes and Dr Madan Mohan Malviya on behalf of the upper caste Hindus.

Significance

The Mc Donald had represented the major breach not only within Indian nationalism but also within the Hindu society. It created the potential for open conflict between the depressed classes and upper castes.

Therefore, the Poona Pact proved to be a timely intervention that diffused the situation.
However, the relationship between Dr Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi could never be repaired fully.

Mahatma Gandhi and the Congress leadership had received a major wake up call. From now on, they exhibited greater sincerity towards the issues of the untouchables. It was

during this episode that Mahatma Gandhi began his Harijan program to end untouchability and emancipate the dalits.

His untouchable emancipation program was based on his philosophies of trusteeship and class cooperation.

His advocacy of dalit dignity was directed towards the upper castes whose attitude and behaviour he was trying to change.

On the other hand, Dr Ambedkar disapproved of this strategy.

According to him, the trusteeship model could never succeed because it was the upper class that was responsible for suppressing the dalits and treating them as untouchables.

He accused Mahatma Gandhi of trying to derail the dalit movement by diffusing the radical momentum that it was gaining. He further accused Mahatma Gandhi of being biased towards the upper castes and of working to upper class interests and maintains the social status quo.

Dr Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi also differed when it came to the strategy to address untouchability and caste based oppression.

For Mahatma Gandhi solution lay in the Harijan program. It involved-

Educating the upper castes through his 'Harijan' newspaper by the suffering of the depressed classes, their thinking and their aspirations. This was meant to engender empathy for the dalits.

Citing religious scripture to argue that untouchability was not part of the original Hindu community and thus must be discarded.

To remove the concept of purity and pollution by claiming that the untouchables are manifestations of the divine (Harijan i.e. children of the God).

To encourage the upper castes to perform manual labour thus breaking down social taboos and removing the stigma associated with it.

Dr Ambedkar on the other hand felt that Gandhian strategy was inherently flawed. Varna and caste systems were designed to oppress the depressed classes. Thus, a radical change was necessary.

He advocated for the annihilation of the caste system due to its systematically oppressive nature. He argued that the dalits would never be able to live with dignity within a system that was designed to discriminate against, humiliate and oppress them. Thus, the caste and Varna distinctions must be destroyed if dalits were to have any chance at emancipation.

Inspired by other reformers such as Shri Narayan Guru and EV Ramaswamy Naicker

'Periyar', Dr Ambedkar wanted the dalits to begin a movement against the use of family names or caste denominations. Similarly, he wanted to encourage inter-caste and inter-Varna marriages to dilute caste and Varna identities.

However, seeing the resistance to such movements, his final solution was that dalits should permanently leave the systemic oppression that they faced within Varna and caste system and consider themselves to be a religious minority distinct from Hinduism.

By the time of independence, it had become clear that both Gandhi as well as Ambedkar had failed when it came to addressing untouchability and emancipating the

untouchables. Therefore, Dr Ambedkar resolved to encourage the dalits to leave the fold of Hinduism and convert to a system that did not consider them impure and untouchable.

He considered several options as a new religion for the dalits, most prominent among which were Jainism, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism.

Jainism was rejected since modern Jainism was almost indistinguishable from modern Hinduism and converting to it could have presented the danger of the revival of the established pattern of the society.

Christianity was rejected since it was considered too foreign and unfamiliar. It may have alienated the dalits from their indigenous roots and thus created hurdles for both their spiritual journey as well as national education.

Islam was rejected because Dr Ambedkar was concerned about the future of dalit women within the fully patriarchal Islamic society. Further, historically conversion of

untouchables to Islam had not sufficiently ended their social marginalization. Most importantly, country had recently undergone painful partition accompanied with massive bouts of communal violence between Hindus and Muslims. If dalits were to embrace Islam en masse it could spark another communal pogrom.

Dr Ambedkar only settled in Buddhism due to its Indian roots and the reformative nature of its teachings. It was distinct enough that dalits would be able to maintain their separate identity but not so distinct that they would feel alienated. Thus, in a massive rally he converted to Buddhism transforming it to Neo-Buddhism.

Months' INC Rule Contents Post CDM strategic debate within the INC.............................................................................................3 Stage 1.................................................................................................................................................3 Stage 2 (After the Government of India Act, 1935)............................................................................4 Government of India Act, 1935...............................................................................................................5 Background.........................................................................................................................................5 Provisions............................................................................................................................................5 Critical Evaluation...................................................................................................................................7 Strengths of the Act............................................................................................................................7 Limitations ..........................................................................................................................................7 Practice Question................................................................................................................................8 Q. Discuss the features of the Government of India Act, 1935. Comparing it to Montford Reforms, discuss its strengths and weaknesses. ............................................................................8 28 Months' INC Rule.............................................................................................................................11 Provincial Elections, 1937.................................................................................................................11 Parties/Contestants..........................................................................................................................11 Congress........................................................................................................................................11 All India Muslim League................................................................................................................11 All India Hindu Mahasabha...........................................................................................................11 Justice Party..................................................................................................................................11 Dr Ambedkar and the Liberal Party ..............................................................................................12 Other regional parties-..................................................................................................................12 Left Parties....................................................................................................................................12 Results...........................................................................................................................................13 Significance and controversy................................................................................................................13 28 Months of Congress Rule.................................................................................................................16 Political Reforms...............................................................................................................................16 Agrarian reforms...............................................................................................................................17

Why the complete abolition of Zamindari not attempted? .........................................................17 Steps taken by Congress ministries...............................................................................................18 Impact of Congress' agrarian programme....................................................................................18 Worker's Programme....................................................................................................................18 Contradiction ................................................................................................................................19 Social Reforms...............................................................................................................................19 Critical evaluation of 28 months' of Congress rule...............................................................................20 Positives............................................................................................................................................20 Negatives...........................................................................................................................................21 End of Congress Rule ............................................................................................................................22

Post CDM strategic debate within the INC Stage 1

Civil Disobedience movement was withdrawn by Mahatma Gandhi in 1934 in accordance with his STS-PCP strategy. Shortly after this, he was arrested and a situation similar to the withdrawal of the non-cooperation movement was created.

At this stage, the elections to the Central Legislative Assembly were scheduled for 1934 raising the big question with regards to the strategy that should be followed by the Congress.

Gandhians wanted to adhere to the STS-PCP strategy and boycott the election. Instead the Congress focused upon constructive work and reviving its grassroot network in preparation for the next mass movement.

Socialists led by JL Nehru and SC Bose did not agree with the decision to withdraw Civil disobedience. They blamed the industrialists and large business interests for its failure.

They argued that the Congress should mobilise workers and peasants into a radical anti-

colonial movement. They believed that British imperialism was weak due to the effects of the Great depression and a determined workers' movement could be able to overthrow it. In this context, Pt Nehru came up with his alternate strategy for mass struggle i.e. the S-V or struggle-victory strategy and pushed for continuous struggle till victory.

In this backdrop, another prominent group emerged within the Congress under the leadership of C. Rajagopalachari who were known as the constitutionalist. They

disagreed with both the Gandhian as well as the socialist strategy. According to them, the task of constructive work among the masses does not require boycotting elections.

Further, they expressed doubts regarding Mahatma Gandhi's leadership due to failure of the Civil Disobedience. On the other hand, the Nehruvian strategy of continuous struggle was considered dangerous since it would involve the element of class struggle. Further, socialists pointed out poor economic condition, high inflation, shortage of essential goods and pessimistic mood of the masses and dismissed the idea that Congress was in a position to mobilise any meaningful popular support. Instead they argued that Congress should contest the elections and enter the legislative chambers. From within these councils, the leaders would lead the struggle against British rule with hope for the masses and enthusing them.

Constitutionalists prevailed. Socialists also got in line with the constitutionalist agenda.

However, Mahatma Gandhi said that it was a moral defeat for him personally and quit the Congress remarking that he was out of tune with the powerful trends within the Congress. This threatened to tear the Congress apart. Thus, Mahatma Gandhi

announced that he would continue to support the Congress from the outside and implicitly approved the Congress' participation in the upcoming election.

Stage 2 (After the Government of India Act, 1935)

Government of India Act, 1935 removed hierarchy from the provinces in accordance with the provisions of this act. Assembly elections were scheduled for 11 British Indian provinces for 1937.

This sparked fresh debate in the Congress revolving around two important questions-

Council entry
Office acceptance

The Constitutionalists supported Council entry and wanted to form governments in the provinces that they were in a position to do so.

They argued that the new act had provided them golden opportunity to give a glimpse of Swaraj to the masses.

Provincial autonomy would allow popularly elected governments to bring social transformation without British intervention. This would further strengthen popular support for the movement and demoralize British bureaucracy.

Once masses taste self-rule, hey will only be hungry for more.

On the other hand, the socialists wanted to boycott 1937 elections due to the shortcomings in the 1935 act that had made no real progress towards Purna Swaraj and

was considered hollow. Further, the Principle of dyarchy had been introduced in the Central government.

Therefore, the socialists wanted to boycott the elections and launch mass movement against British.

Clearly, the socialists were opposed to the idea of office entry since it would be tantamount to collaboration with the government.

However, the Constitutionalists prevailed and in order to present a united front, the socialists agreed to join them.

Socialists participated enthusiastically in campaigning for the elections with Pt Nehru emerging as the base of the Congress was UP.

Government of India Act, 1935 Background

This Act was the final result of the long process that had started with the appointment of the Simon Commission to review the Montford reform. Following this long sequence of events finally led to enactment of the 1935 act. These include-

The Simon Commission Report
Nehru Report
Jinnah's 14 point demand
Round Table Conference
Discussions within the British Parliament
Public opinion elicited through the publication of a white paper.
Drafting within the parliament through a deliberative process. Provisions

The act provided for the establishment of an All India Federation consisting of all British Indian provinces as well as princely states.

Central Legislature was supposed to have two houses-

Council of States with 260 members was to serve as the Upper House. It was to be a permanent body with one-third of the members retiring every second year.

Federal Assembly with 375 members to be the lower house. It would have a term of 5 years.

Princely states would be represented in both these houses through nomination while the representatives of India would be through election.

These houses would continue to have ex-officio and government nominees as well but their proportion was reduced.

However, this provision was never implemented since princely states did not ratify it and the central government continued to be organised on the basis of 1919 act.

Dyarchy was introduced at the centre.

This act provided for the division of the central administrative subjects to two lists- Reserved and Transferred.

Reserved subjects were to be administered by the Governor General with the assistance of his executive councilor.

Transferred subjects were to be administered by the Governor General on the basis of the aid and advice of a council of ministers constituted of not more than 10 ministers chosen from among the elected members of the Central legislature.

This provision was also never implemented.

Legislative devolution was expanded by the creation of three lists of legislative subjects. These were

Federal list
Provincial list
Concurrent list

Act provided for the establishment of Federal Court.

It was to have exclusive jurisdiction over disputes between the different federating units.

Provincial autonomy was introduced with the abolition of dyarchy.

The distinction between the reserved and transferred subjects was done away with. All subjects would be administered by popularly elected ministers who were responsible to the legislature.

Bicameralism was also introduced for the provinces for the first time on a voluntary basis.

The following provinces opted for a bicameral legislature- Assam, Bengal, UP, Bihar, Bombay and Madras.

Two new provinces were created by this act

Sindh was separated from Bombay province
Orissa was separated from Bihar with its capital at Cuttack

Burma and Aden were separated from British India and constituted as separate crown colonies.

Separate electorates were granted to women and workers.
Universal Adult Franchise was not introduced but voting qualifications were lowered by giving right to vote to almost 10% of Indian population.

The Governor General retained his powers to make ordinances, declare emergency, veto bills, restore cuts and certify the defeated legislation.

Similarly, provincial governors had the power to dismiss governments and dissolve legislature. Thus, they continued to enjoy extraordinary powers.

Critical Evaluation Strengths of the Act

1935 act was a giant leap forward in the development of constitutionalism in India. It was the most comprehensive piece of constitutional legislation ever attempted by the British in India.

The provisions of this act formed the basis of the constitution of independent India.

The Indian constitution borrows heavily from this act and roughly 20% of its provisions are based on it. For example, provisions related to the federalism, emergency powers, ordinance making powers, the office of the Governor with suitable modifications were borrowed from the 1935 act.

Supreme Court of India was inspired by this act. It inherited the original jurisdiction of the federal court.

The introduction of provincial autonomy was a big step towards the establishment of responsible government in India.

For the first time, people could feel the benefits of popular sovereignty and a government constituted of representatives elected by them. This act contained extremely significant 'Rules of business of the government of India'.

It detailed the division of administrative work between different departments and ministries. It established hierarchy of officials in each department, creating a chain of command and fixing the jurisdiction of each department throughout all levels.

Following independence, the machinery established by these rules was inherited by the Indian government and continued to provide administrative continuity and efficient and effective administration.

This allowed India to overcome the significant challenges following independence.
On the other hand, Pakistan's administration suffered since it discarded these rules after independence resulting in inter-departmental cooperation and rivalry undermining administration.

Limitations

While the Government of India Act, 1935 was a major improvement over the previous scheme, it was unable to satisfy nationalists due to the following factors-

Instead of Purna Swaraj, it introduced the failed principle of dyarchy in the centre.
Despite the introduction of provincial autonomy, there was no fundamental change in the power structure.

The discretionary powers of the Governors and Governor General allowed them to undermine the responsibly elected government.

The demand for Universal Adult Franchise had been ignored. Only 10% of Indians enjoyed the right to vote and the voting qualifications were skewed in favour of the

privileged section. Thus, most vulnerable section of the Indian population was left completely voiceless.

The divisive principle of separate electorate was expanded further to further divide and weaken Indian society.

By making the participation of princely states into the All India Federation voluntary, the act sought to permanently destroy the unity and integrity of future India.

Further, this also undermined the nationalist sentiments and urges of the people living in the Princely states.

Therefore, the Government of India Act, 1935 has been referred as 'sugar coated quinine'.

It was designed to perpetuate British dominion over India without any meaningful reform. In fact, it was designed to expand the British apparatus of constitutional autocracy.

Practice Question Q. Discuss the features of the Government of India Act, 1935. Comparing it to Montford Reforms, discuss its strengths and weaknesses.

Government of India Act, 1935 was formulated after a lengthy discussion and was so voluminous that it is also considered as the precursor to the independent India's constitution.

Features of the Government of India Act, 1935

Central Legislature- it as a bicameral legislature-

Council of States with 260 members was to serve as the Upper House. It was to be a permanent body with one-third of the members retiring every second year.

Federal Assembly with 375 members to be the lower house. It would have a term of 5 years.

Princely states would be represented in both these houses through nomination while the representatives of India would be through election.

Dyarchy was introduced at Centre with subjects divided into two lists- reserved and transferred. Reserved were to be administered by British executives whereas transferred subjects were given to responsible elected members.

Administrative subjects were divided into three lists-

Federal
Provincial
Concurrent
Residuary powers resided with Governor General.

Federal court was set up which later converted into the present day Supreme Court as the main court for federal disputes.

Provincial autonomy was given thus completing the process of decentralisation.

Dyarchy was also abolished from provinces.

Bicameralism was also introduced in the provinces on a voluntary basis.
Separate electorates were granted to women and workers.
Universal Adult Franchise was not introduced but voting qualifications were lowered by giving right to vote to almost 10% of Indian population.

The Governor General retained his powers to make ordinances, declare emergency, veto bills, restore cuts and certify the defeated legislation.

Similarly, provincial governors had the power to dismiss governments and dissolve legislature. Thus, they continued to enjoy extraordinary powers.

Its strengths and weaknesses as compared to the Montford Reforms

Strengths

It ended the dyarchy in provinces which was introduced by Montford reforms. Instead it introduced responsible governments in provinces.

Provincial autonomy was a significant step in divergence with the act of 1919.
Supreme Court of India was established through the Act of 1935 thus strengthening the federal disputes resolution mechanism.

Rather than on a religious basis as in the case of Montford reforms, this Act provided separate electorates to women and workers.

Franchise was significantly increased as compared to the 1919 act.
Clear separation of powers between centre and the union through three lists mentioned above was major step for legislative devolution.

Weaknesses

Instead of Purna Swaraj, it introduced the failed principle of dyarchy in the centre.
Despite the introduction of provincial autonomy, there was no fundamental change in the power structure.

The discretionary powers of the Governors and Governor General allowed them to undermine the responsibly elected government.

By making the participation of princely states into the All India Federation voluntary, the act sought to permanently destroy the unity and integrity of future India.

Franchise was limited to only 10% of the population.

While the 1919 Act necessitated revision in less than a decade, Act of 1935 went on to influence the Constitution of India. However, it had some weaknesses due to which it had to go through the process of Indianisation and democratization by India constituent assembly.

28 Months'INC Rule Provincial Elections, 1937 Under the framework created by the Government of India Act, 1935, Provincial elections were held in 11 British Indian provinces in 1937. These were-

Eastern Muslim majority provinces- Assam and Bengal
Western Muslim majority provinces- Punjab, Sindh and NWFP
Hindu majority provinces- United Provinces, Central Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, Madras and Bombay.

Parties/Contestants Congress

It campaigned in all provinces
It contested the elections in General, reserved as well as separate electorate constituencies.

Its manifesto promised radical transformations including Abolition of Zamindari, tenancy reform, debt relief and reform of moneylending, upliftment of harijans and women,

workers' reforms including job security, higher wages and the right to form unions, release of political prisoners, ending of the police state established by the British etc.

All India Muslim League

It contested primarily in Muslim majority provinces, focusing upon separate electorate, reserved constituencies.

It promised to protect the religious freedoms and rights of Muslims and to protect the Muslim interests from 'Hindu tyranny'.

All India Hindu Mahasabha

It contested the election throughout India and promised to use state apparatus to promote Hindu culture, oppose British rule and defeat the politics of appeasement.

Justice Party

It campaigned in Madras exclusively and promised to protect the interests of non- Brahmins against the Congress' pro-Brahmin politics.

It also promised more reservation and jobs for non-Brahmins.
More crucially, it promised to defend the large non-Brahmin businesses and landlords against the Congress' radical agenda.

Dr Ambedkar and the Liberal Party

It campaigned primarily in the Marathi speaking regions of the Bombay province.
It promised to end untouchability and uplift the depressed classes through structural reforms.

He accused the Congress of diluting the dalit movement with its Harijan programme.

Other regional parties

Sindh united Party of Khwaja Abdullah Haroom Unionist Party- Sikandar Hayat Khan Krishak Praja Party (Bengal) - Fazl-ul Haq

These parties contested in their respective provinces.
They promised to uphold the interests of their Muslim constituents against the All India Hindu majority.

They also promised to protect Muslim businessmen and landlords against the Congress' radical workers' movement.

Left Parties

Communists (CPI) did not participate as the centre had banned them.
Congress Socialist Party formed in 1934 has emerged as a major influence within the Congress. They had most vocally opposed the Congress' participation in the election and office acceptance during the strategic debate.

Instead, they wanted the Congress to launch a new mass movement with the support of workers and peasants.

However, they were defeated by the alliance of constitutionalists and Gandhians.
Therefore, at the Faizpur session of 1936, it was decided that Congress would take part in the elections.

The Socialists then changed their strategy and worked to bring the Congress closer to workers and peasants.

After elections, the socialists worked to fulfill the strongest working class demands within the framework of legal authority.

Results

The Congress secured clear majority in 5 out of 6 Hindu majority provinces except Bombay.

Congress also emerged as the single largest party in Bombay and formed a coalition government with the help of smaller parties.

Dr Ambedkar's party performed well winning 11 out of the 17 seats assigned as separate electorates for dalits.

The Congress also emerged as the single largest party in Assam and most surprisingly in NWFP which had an overwhelming Muslim population. Here also, the Congress formed coalition governments.

In Punjab, Sindh and Bengal, the regional parties emerged as the leaders. Jinnah entered a pact with these local parties and the Muslim League formed the government as the junior coalition partners.

Gradually, the regional parties of these provinces were co-opted by Jinnah and emerged as Muslim League proxies.

The 1937 elections represented an electoral disaster for the Muslim League. They performed poorly across the country and even in separate electorate and reserved

provinces for Muslims. This weakened its legitimacy as the leader of Indian Muslims.

Significance and controversy

The elections became controversial in the context of the UP Legislative Assembly. The

Congress and Muslim League had formed a pre-poll alliance in accordance of which, they had divided the electoral constituencies among themselves. However, tension was present from the very beginning as Nehru had rejected Jinnah's proposal that the Muslim League should have exclusive rights to field candidates in constituencies reserved for Muslims.

The election results were a disaster for Muslim League. It performed exceptionally poorly while the Congress performed exceptionally well. Jinnah tried to convince Nehru

that the Congress should not appoint any Muslim ministers claiming that the Muslim league had the exclusive right to do so. However, Pt Nehru refused for the following reasons-

Congress was morally opposed to this proposal as it would have weakened its secular position and made it an exclusively Hindu party. Simultaneously, it could have legitimised the Muslim League as the exclusive representative of Indian Muslims.

The Congress no longer needed the Muslim League's support to form the government as it had secured the complete majority to form the government.

Jinnah accused the Congress of violating the pact and began poisonous campaign targeting the Congress and personally attacking Nehru.

He addressed a series of mass rallies across the Muslim dominated regions of UP. In his communally charged speeches, he engaged in fear mongering. He told the Muslim masses that Islam is in danger under the Hindu dominated Congress rule.

His lightening campaign proved extremely effective.
Within three months, Jinnah was able to enlist roughly one lakh new Muslim league members in UP alone.

The same pattern was repeated across India and was highly successful especially in Muslim majority provinces of Western and Eastern India.

Jinnah's new radicalism against the Congress was also evident in the functioning of the provincial governments of Punjab, Sindh and Bengal.

The Muslim League's coalition governments in these provinces actively used the colonial police and security apparatus to suppress Congress, socialists and Hindu right wing politicians alike.

A visible rift began emerging in the two halves of India foretelling the painful future.

The election result legitimised the Congress as the most popular party in the whole of India.

These elections also shattered the artificial parity between the Congress and other political parties that had been manufactured by the government to deliberately weaken the Congress' movement.

The masses had responded positively to the Congress' inclusive and progressive agenda while rejecting the divisive politics of caste, religion and language. In other words, the masses and voted for free, progressive and united India.

This was a big blow on the morale of the British rule.

The 1935 election results were also a huge step forward in the emerging socialist movement in the Indian politics.

The masses had supported the left leaning agenda of the Congress and the Congress had benefited greatly in the form of major victories.

The growing leftward shift was reflected both within and outside the institutional framework of the Congress ministries.

Many Kisan Sabha leaders became agriculture ministers in the provincial governments while many trade union leaders were appointed as labour ministers.

In order to fulfill electoral promises, the provincial governments of several Congress governed states introduced policies to address the demands of the working class. SC

Bose was possibly the most vocal left leaning Congress leader who was elected as the Congress President twice in 1938 (Haripura) and 1939 (Tripuri) and set up the National Planning Committee (1938) to begin the task of economic planning.

The masses had voted in favour of the inclusive All India framework of the Congress. They had come out in support of a free, united, progressive and socialist India. The

Congress would have to fulfill its promises and commit itself to the electoral agenda that had led to its electoral success.

In future, the Congress would continue to push forward this agenda even more strongly.

However, the 1935 election also exposed the dangerous cracks present within the national movement.

One of these cracks appeared immediately. Congress and Muslim League parted ways following the controversy associated with the UP assembly elections.

The other crack that is between the Congress right and left wing developed gradually as a result of the constant friction between these two ideological opponents within the framework of legal authority.

In the end, Congress was not able to fully satisfy either group resulting in the erosion of popular support in both camps.

The alienated sections moved towards the Muslim League and its highly communalized agenda. The Congress learnt the bitter lesson that campaigning and governing are two radically different tasks. It came face to face with the practical obstacles of administration and found itself wanting.

28 Months of Congress Rule

The Congress was able to form governments in eight out of the eleven provinces namely UP, Bihar, CP, Orissa, Bombay, Madras, Assam and NWFP.

In these provinces, the Congress introduced a series of policies to fulfill its promises made to the people during the election campaign.

These policies fall under the Congress' political, agricultural, industrial and social programme.

Political Reforms

Emergency powers acquired by the Provincial governments though the Public Safety Act, 1929 were repealed.

Bans on political organisations such as the Hindustan Sewa Dal and the Youth League were also lifted.

However, the ban on the communists remained in place since it was enforced by the Central government and could be lifted only by it.

All restrictions on the Press were removed.

Securities taken from the publishers were removed and the policy of blacklisting hostile publications from government advertisement was lifted.

Repealed arms licenses were reformed and confiscated arms were returned.
Police powers were curbed.

Political prisoners were freed and detainees were liberated.
Further, the Congress ministries ended the policy of shadowing of political leaders or opposition by the CID.

The Congress ministries also worked to restore the properties confiscated during the Civil disobedience movement.

Further, the pensions of those government officials who had sympathized with the civil disobedience movement were also restored.

However, the Congress' record with regards to the civil liberties was not perfect. Right wing Congress government of Madras led by C. Rajagopalachari prosecuted socialist leaders such as Yusuf Mehrally and SS Batliwala.

Much worse was the Bombay government with KM Munshi as the Home minister. He used CID to shadow the communists and left wing Congressmen earning a public reprimand from the Congress high command i.e. Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru.

Agrarian reforms

The Congress tried to provide economic reforms to peasants as quickly as possible. It remained committed to its policies of tenancy reforms, reduction of land revenue and rent, reducing the debt burden of rent and regulating the moneylending business.

Why the complete abolition of Zamindari not attempted?

Congress was pursuing a strategy of class adjustment. Multi-class movement required the balancing of mutually opposite class interests. This was necessary to present a

united front to British imperialism, the main enemy of Indians. Congress wanted to win over or atleast neutralized as large a part of the Zamindar class as possible and isolate the enemy depriving it of all social support within India. This was even more necessary since in many parts of the country, small landlords actively supported the national movement.

Under the constitutional scheme established by the 1935 act, provincial governments were not powerful enough to carry out the total abolition of Zamindari.

The Governor General enjoyed extraordinary powers with respect to general administration and since Zamindari abolition would have involved an overhaul of the administrative structure, it would definitely have been blocked.

In many of the Congress governed provinces, bicameral legislature has been set up under the Government of India Act, 1935- UP, Bihar, Madras, Orissa, and Bombay. The

upper houses (state legislative councils) represented reactionary second chambers consisting of nominated members and loyalists elected on the basis of a very narrow franchise. They were dominated by Zamindars, moneylenders and capitalists with the Congress forming a small minority. They created hurdles in the path of any substantial reform which threatened their class interests.

The task of Zamindari abolition would have required extraordinary funding. The provincial governments were not in a financial position to fund such an initiative.

Further, the provincial governments did not have sufficient information on the crucial components of the agrarian structure such as land rights, occupancy status, land use etc.

without this information, the abolition of Zamindar was virtually impossible.

The Congress leadership also lacked confidence in the local bureaucracy whose cooperation was considered essential for Zamindari abolition. This was because many of the Zamindari employees had vested interests in the continuation of Zamindari.

The Congress ministries were also constrained for time. Leadership knew that ministries would not last long since the logic of their politics was to challenge imperialism and not

cooperate with it. Therefore, the ministries had to act quickly and achieve as much as possible in the limited time available.

Steps taken by Congress ministries

Tenancy laws were passed in UP, Bihar and Orissa giving several rights to the tenants and imposing restrictions on Zamindars. In Bombay, CP and NWFP also, the peasants received occupancy rights, security of tenure and legal protections.

Rent control was attempted in many provinces with differing degrees of success. The poorest performer was Bombay, while UP and Bihar were the most successful.

Reduction of land revenue was also attempted in all Congress ruled provinces. However, except Bihar where it was reduced by half, it was blocked either by the state legislative councils or the Governor General.

The regulation of moneylending ran into legal hurdles as the Congress faced stiff opposition from a dual alliance of moneylenders and lawyers. Legal profession defended

the moneylending business and opposed its strict regulation because debt litigation constituted a major source of their income. Thus, progress remained abortive. However, in provinces such as Bihar, Orissa, CP, Madras and NWFP Debtors' Relief Acts provided some relief in the form of reducing the debt burden, liberating bonded labourers and abolishing the fees or use of community lands such as grazing pastures and village land.

Impact of Congress' agrarian programme

Congress remained steadfastly committed to peasant cause.

Most peasants across India remained loyal to the Congress.
Congress also benefitted from the newly emergent organised peasant movements such as the Kisan sabhas.

However, left leaning Congress leaders were dissatisfied by the slow progress and drifted towards the communists.

Further, the peasant programme also alienated Zamindars and moneylenders who began supporting the loyalist cause.

Most Muslim zamindars and moneylenders gravitated towards the Muslim League and regional Muslim parties who promised to shield them from the tyranny of Congress, the communists and the Congress President.

Worker's Programme

The Congress ministries in general adopted a pro-labour stance. Their approach included-

Promote labour interest while upholding the industrial peace.
Ensuring that strikes and lockouts become measures of the last resort.
Establishing a fair and just dispute resolution mechanism.
Advocating compulsory arbitration before ay strike or lockout.
Creating goodwill between workers and capitalists with the Congress emerging as the intermediary.

Congress took some steps to fulfill worker's demands such as setting up an Industrial disputes committee in Bombay and Labour inquiry committees in UP and Bihar. They recommended-

Compulsory arbitration of industrial disputes
Prohibition of strikes and lockouts
Increasing worker's wages
Providing for the recruitment of workers through independent labour boards
Maternity benefits to women workers
Strengthening of trade union rights Contradiction

However, from the very beginning, Congress' worker programme ran into major contradictions-

The capitalists had provided much of the campaign funding to the Congress during the 1937 elections. Thus, radical workers' programme was not possible.

There was a growing rift between the right and left wings within the Congress. Right wing leaders felt threatened by the emergence of Bolshevism and did not want a

bloody revolution that would derail the national movement, disrupt administration, deteriorate law and order and destroy national unity. On the other hand, left wing leaders questioned the Congress' sincerity towards the workers' agenda. For example, various trade bills were designed to support the trade unions created by the capitalists rather than the workers.

As a result, while the conservatives slowed down the agenda of the workers' movement, they were unable to restore the trust of the capitalist class. On the other hand, the workers felt increasingly agitated and drifted further towards the left.

Congress policy of class cooperation ad strategy of class adjustment received a major setback due to the division of class groups into pro and anti-Congress factions.

Social Reforms

Prohibition was implemented in selected areas of different states. The Gandhian objective of total prohibition was not attempted because-

There was lack of popular support in many areas
Excise duty on liquor was a major source of provincial revenue.

Untouchable Emancipation- in the sphere of emancipating and empowering untouchables or harijans, following steps were taken-

Laws were passed allowing harijans to enter temple freely.
Access to public spaces such as roads, parks, theatres, schools, restaurants, hotels, water wells etc. was given legally.

No government authority or functionary would recognize any usage or custom which imposed any civil disability on harijans.

The number of scholarships to harijan students was increased.
Recruitment of harijans in police and government services was encouraged.

The Congress also paid attention to primary, secondary and higher education alongwith public health and sanitation.

Special emphasis was given to the education of harijans and girls.
Mass literacy campaigns for adults were organised.
Basic education with an emphasis on manual and productive work was expanded.

Subsidy support was provided to Khadi enterprises and village industries.
Prison reforms were carried out involving better conditions of incarceration, abolition of solitary confinement, introduction of educational and rehabilitative programmes, release of undertrials and legal access to imprisoned inmates.

Critical evaluation of 28 months' of Congress rule Positives

On the whole, the legislative and administrative record of the Congress ministries was positive. Even though the left was critical, many of its expectations had been fulfilled to a large extent.

A major achievement of the Congress ministries was their firm handling of communal riots. This was remarkable given the heavily charged atmosphere of communal politics

prevalent during the late 1930 s due to the divisive agenda being pursued by the Muslim League.

Congress leadership also demonstrated its ability to resist the imperialist design of using constitutional reforms to weaken nationalism. Instead, they demonstrated how

constitutional power could be used to further national aims rather than getting co-

opted. As a result, national consciousness was far stronger at the end of Congress rule than it had been in 1937.

Another important outcome of 28 months of Congress rule was the demoralization of the bureaucracy. British civil servants could no longer lock the reform agenda of

popularly elected Indian ministers. Many came to believe that the end of British rule was simply a matter of time now.

Congress rule also gave the people glimpse of Swaraj. It showed what could be achieved by committed leadership enjoying relatively little power. Thus, it raised the hopes of the

masses towards the prospect of Purna swarajya. As a result, masses were ready to sacrifice even more because of complete independence. This is reflected in the extent of mass participation during the Quit India Movement.

The Congress was also able to prevent provincialism which had been one of the major objectives of the 1935 act. British expected that Indian unity would be weakened by the independent policy of the different provincial governments.

However, Congress ministries strictly adhered to the Central Congress committee's directives throughout the 28 months. Thus, nationalism was strengthened instead of becoming weaker.

By balancing the contradictory and mutually exclusive interests of the right and the left, Congress was able to prevent major split from taking place. This was something that the British were desperately trying to engineer since 1934.

Negatives

There was significant growth of factional strife on both ideological and personal grounds. There was constant tension between the left and the right wing leaders.

Due to the rising friction, some leaders even resigned from their ministerial positions including NB Khare who resigned as Premier of CP. Similarly, labour leaders of Bombay and Madras also resigned in opposition to the Trade Disputes Act.

The emergence of opportunist leaders- Since the Congress was an open platform, so political opportunists were drawn to it due to the allure of ministerial power.

However, they did not firmly believe in the Congress' agenda and diluted progressive and reformist credentials of the Congress ministries from within.

Misuse of governmental power- some right wing dominated Congress ministries resorted to the use of colonial laws, and police to suppress their political opponents. In this regard, Bombay and Madras governments were the biggest culprits.

Not only did this erode the trust of the ordinary people, it also widened the emerging political divide between the right and the left.

The strategy of class adjustment failed to fully satisfy either class. The zamindars and capitalists became apprehensive of the peasant and workers' program, this forced the

Congress to dilute these programmes, thus alienating the workers. In the end, 28 months of Congress rule ended up alienating a section of both classes.

The failure of the Congress ministries to fulfill the peasants' and workers' demands fully broke the alliance between the Congress and organised workers and peasant movements.

For example, All India Kisan Sabha led by Swami Sahajanand Saraswati did not participate in the Quit India Movement and remained loyal alongwith the Communist Party of India.

End of Congress Rule- On 22 nd October, 1939, Congress ministries of all the eight provinces resigned en masse. The following are the reasons ascribed for the decision-

Second World War had begun and Allied powers were facing reversals from the axis powers particularly from Germany. Thus, Viceroy Linlithgow unilaterally declared war on

behalf of India against Germany on 3 rd September, 1939 without consulting popular mood in India.

Congress objected to this unilateral declaration of war making India a party to it without its own consent. Even within Congress, there were varying opinions with regards to the response to this declaration.

Socialists led by SC Bose talked in favour of launching a mass movement against the British rule as it was already vulnerable at the moment.

On the other hand, Gandhians were not in favour of the immediate action. Rather, they wanted a negotiated settlement through which they would extend Indian support to the British in return for the guarantee of self-determination with the transfer of power to an interim government immediately.

However, conservative group of leaders wanted the Congress to support the British unconditionally. They did not want the Congress to resign at that time which would embarrass British government. They believed the British fight against fascism as just.

Mass movement at that time was neither possible due to lack of preparation nor desirable considering the global threat of fascism. However, supporting the British

unconditionally, as the conservatives wanted, would erode the credibility of the Congress in the eyes of the people. Thus, the Gandhian idea of negotiated settlement seemed more feasible but to bring the British government to the negotiating table needed Congress' resignation.

On 22 nd December, 1939, the Muslim League celebrated the 'Day of Deliverance' in order to celebrate the deliverance of people from 'Caste Hindu Congress Rule'.

Moreover, the resignation of Congress also allowed the Muslim League and its coalition partners to form governments in NWFP and Assam.

Apart from this, there was growing opposition within the Congress on the issue of office acceptance. Socialists were particularly against any participation in the British administrative machinery which they considered as collaboration.

By this time, Socialists had grown further strong mainly because of Congress' provincial governments' failure in class adjustment and the demand for resignation became stronger.

Further, running of the Congress ministries had become problematic resulting in internal divisions, thus weakening the Congress from within and also destroying national unity.

Owing to some unpopular decisions, Congress was losing its base among masses which was a major concern.

Rising Corruption in Congress and the misuse of ministerial authority was antithetical to the Congress' initial idea behind the acceptance of the office.

Central leadership as well as those leaders who had opposed the idea of taking office for this exact fear was now vociferously criticizing the prevailing corruption.

Open criticism of the provincial governments has already been discussed above.

Contents August Offer............................................................................................................................................3 Background.........................................................................................................................................3 August Offer........................................................................................................................................4 Evaluation of the August Offer ...........................................................................................................5 Individual Satyagraha (1940-41).............................................................................................................5 Practice Question................................................................................................................................7 Q. Discuss the circumstances behind the August offer. Why was no mass movement launched following the failure of this offer?..................................................................................................7 Q. What were the circumstances behind the Individual Satyagraha? Discuss in light of the ideological debate within the Congress..........................................................................................8 Cripps Proposal.......................................................................................................................................9 Background.........................................................................................................................................9 Factors behind sending the Cripps Mission........................................................................................9 Cripps Proposal.................................................................................................................................10 Clarifications- Cripps also made two clarifications-......................................................................10 Conditions.....................................................................................................................................10 Departure from the August Offer.................................................................................................10 Reasons for the failure of the Cripps Proposal.............................................................................11 Practice Question..............................................................................................................................12 Q. The draft declaration of the Cripps proposal was conservative, reactionary and limited and finally the mission ended in failure. Comment.............................................................................12 Quit India Movement............................................................................................................................13 Factors...............................................................................................................................................13 Beginning of the spread of the movement.......................................................................................15 Mass activity and extent of participation.........................................................................................17 Opposition to the Quit India Movement..........................................................................................17 Significance of Quit India Movement ...............................................................................................18 Constitutional deadlock........................................................................................................................19 CR Formula/ Rajaji Formula..................................................................................................................20 Gandhi-Jinnah talks (September, 1944)................................................................................................20 Desai-Liaqat Pact (1945).......................................................................................................................21

Practice Question..............................................................................................................................22 Q. Shed light on the constitutional deadlock that emerged in Indian politics following the Quit India Movement. What were the principles on the basis of which Jinnah prevented the easing of this deadlock?...............................................................................................................................22 Shimla Conference and the Wavell Plan (June 1945)...........................................................................23 Indian National Army Movement.........................................................................................................24 Red Fort Trials...................................................................................................................................26 Royal Indian Naval Mutiny....................................................................................................................26 Impact...............................................................................................................................................27 British Response................................................................................................................................27 Response of the Indian leadership....................................................................................................27 Factors for their opposition to the RIN mutiny and mass uprisings.................................................28 Aftermath..........................................................................................................................................28 Significance...........................................................................................................................................28 Cabinet Mission Plan (1946).................................................................................................................29 Indian response.................................................................................................................................30 Government's response....................................................................................................................30

August Offer Background  On 3 rd September, 1939, Governor General Linlithgow declared India to be a belligerent state on Britain's side in the Second World War without consulting Indians.

 Congress Working Committee met Gandhiji at Wardha between the 10-14 September.

Gandhiji advocated unconditional support to the government as there was a clear distinction between Nazi Germany and the western democracies.

Socialists led by SC Bose argued that both sides were immoral as they were fighting for either gaining or defending colonies.

Pt Nehru made a sharp distinction between fascism and democracy he believed that justice was on the side of the Britain but the war itself was the result of capitalism. Therefore, he advocated no Indian participation till independence. At the same time, Indians should not take advantage of Britain's helplessness.

 On 14 th September, Congress resolved that

India will not join the war since it was being fought for democracy and freedom whereas that freedom was denied to India.

Britain should prove its commitment to freedom by granting Purna Swaraj to India.
Government should declare its war aims and also how the principles of democracy would apply to India.

Indian cooperation would be forthcoming if Indian demands were fulfilled.  The government responded on the 17 th September, 1939 with Linlithgow's statement-

The Governor General claimed that Britain was waging war to defend world peace.
He also declared that after the war, government would modify the 1935 act in accordance with the desires of all communities, parties, interests and Indian princes.

He also promised to immediately set up consultative committee whose advice would be sought whenever needed.

 The government was following a hidden agenda through this declaration. It had been a long standing practice of the government to take advantage of major wars in order to regain lost ground in the Congress by provoking it into direct confrontation.

Even before the declaration of war, Governor General had acquired emergency powers under the 1935 act.

Allied troops stationed in India could be used to suppress any movement.
At the same time, Indian nationalists could be painted as sympathisers of Germany and Japan and international opinion would be turned against them.  On 22 nd October, 1939, the Congress Working Committee met at Wardha-

It rejected the Viceroy's statement
Decided not to support the war
Called upon the Congress ministries to resign.  Mahatma Gandhi responded to Linlithgow's statement with the following words-

'The Congress has asked for bread and has gotten stone'……..the old policy of divide and rule is to continue'.  The debate emerged within the Congress on the question of immediate Mass Satyagraha.

Gandhiji and his followers did not favour immediate mass struggle because they felt that- a) Allied cause was just b) Communal sensitivity could lead to riots c) The Congress organisation was in poor shape d) The masses were not ready for a struggle

Thus, instead of mass struggle, Gandhiji advocated for toning up the Congress organisation carrying on political work among the masses and negotiating with the government till all possibilities of a settlement were exhausted.

In accordance with these views, the Congress adopted the Ramgarh resolution in March, 1940. It stated that mass civil disobedience would begin as soon as Congress organisation was ready or if a crisis emerges.

On the other hand, leftist group led by SC Bose characterized the war as an imperialist war. Therefore, sustained resistance was necessary. While they accepted that weaknesses were present and masses were unprepared, such problems would be swept aside once the call for mass struggle is given.

When the Congress adopted the Ramgarh resolution, SC Bose floated the idea of a parallel Congress to launch a mass movement. However, the Congress Socialist Party and the Communist Party of India did not agree.

 Pakistan Resolution (March, 1940) - In Lahore session, the Muslim League adopted the Pakistan resolution calling for the grouping for geographically contiguous areas where Muslims were in a majority into separate state.

 Change of government in Britain- In the meanwhile, Chamberlain was succeeded by Churchill and the Conservative Party came to power. It was openly hostile to the Congress and Indian nationalism.

 In this background, the war in Europe took a menacing turn against the British. By May 1940, France had fallen and Germany had occupied all of Western Europe. The battle of Britain was starting and the Germans were carrying out sustained bombing raids on British cities in preparation for amphibious invasion of Britain.

As a result, British government became increasingly desperate for Indian support and softened its stance towards Indian nationalists. August Offer  On 8 th August, 1940, Governor General Linlithgow presented set of proposals to Indians in order to secure full Indian cooperation in the British war effort. These included-

Dominion status would be given to India after the war.
The Viceroy's Executive Council will be expanded so that eight out of its 12 members would be Indians.

War Advisory Council would be set up to organise the Indian war effort.
A Constituent assembly consisting of primarily Indians would be set up after the war in order to draft a new constitution.

Full weightage would be given to minority opinion and no constitution would be accepted without their consent.

Evaluation of the August Offer  For the first time, the inherent right of Indians to draft their own constitution was accepted by the government. Long standing Congress demand for a Constituent assembly was conceded.

 Dominion status was explicitly offered for the first time. It represented the first concrete step towards the establishment of self-rule and democracy in India.

 The creation of a War Advisory Council represented a retreat from the original British position that they had the right to unilaterally pull India into a conflict.

 However, the August offer completely failed to satisfy Indian aspirations due to the following shortcomings-

Congress wanted complete independence while only dominion status was offered. Pt Nehru reacted by saying that 'the concept of dominion status is as dead as a doornail'.

Further, Congress wanted immediate transfer of power. On the other hand, under the August offer, most of its important provisions including transfer of power and creation of a constituent assembly would come into effect after the war.

While Indians wanted that the new constitution should be drafted exclusively by Indians, the August offer provided for its drafting by primarily Indians.

The British would therefore continue interfering in the constitution making process.
The assurance of minority veto was not acceptable to the Congress. It was clearly an attempt to divide and rule Indians and was a major threat to Indian unity. Further, it

established an artificial parity between the Congress and Muslim League. Therefore, Congress rejected the August offer. The CWC met Mahatma Gandhi at Wardha where the plan for launching individual Satyagraha was revealed.

Individual Satyagraha (1940-41)

 After the rejection of the August offer, the government became adamant and took several steps to suppress Indian nationalism.

The Defence of India Act, 1940 was applied widely to preventively detain Indians. Conscription was imposed in many areas which proved to be highly unpopular.

A strict regime of war time rationing was introduced resulting in massive shortages of food grains and cloth alongwith other essential items like salt, sugar, oil etc. inflation also reached new heights and the ordinary masses were the worst affected.

The government also suspended civil liberties imposing war time restrictions on speech, movement, assembly and association.  Once again, Socialists wanted an immediate programme of mass Civil disobedience but Gandhiji advocated patience due to-

unpreparedness of the masses,
poor state of Congress organisation,
Low level of Hindu-Muslim unity.  Instead, he revealed this programme of Individual Satyagraha with the following objectives-

Restoration of the suspended freedoms
To show that nationalist patience was not due to weakness
To express that Indians were not interested in war and did not differentiate between imperialism and fascism.

To give another opportunity to the government to accept Indian demands peacefully.  In accordance with these aims, the Individual Satyagraha was launched in December, 1940 with Acharya Vinoba Bhave, Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru and Brahmadutt being the first three Satyagrahis.

They began by criticizing the British war effort and shaping public opinion against the war.

Their objective was to gather mass support and march towards Delhi if the government did not arrest them.

However, all three were detained under the Defence of India rules.
Following this, Mahatma Gandhi suspended the movement temporarily in order to open negotiations with the government. However, there was no response.

The arrest of the three individual Satyagrahis had aroused great mass sympathy and when the movement resumed in January, 1941, the masses responded enthusiastically. The government had to arrest more than twenty thousand people.

 The complexion of Indian politics changed drastically from December, 1941 afterwards.

With Japan's lightning victories in South-East Asia.

 In preparation for a Japanese invasion of India, the British released all the arrested Satyagrahis bringing the Satyagraha to an end.

Practice Question Q. Discuss the circumstances behind the August offer. Why was no mass movement launched following the failure of this offer?

August Offer of 1940 was proposed by the then Viceroy Linlithgow in order to settle the tussle between nationalists and the government so as to deal efficiently with the rising pressure of Second World War. However, it was filled with the evils of imperialism and was bound to fail.

Circumstances behind the August Offer

 On 3 rd September, 1939, Governor General Linlithgow declared India to be a belligerent state on Britain's side in the Second World War without consulting Indians.

 This led Congress to meet in which it unilaterally criticized the British action. It was argued that while British were fighting for independence, it is denying the same to India.

 Finally, in October 1939, Congress resigned from its provinces thus exacerbating the political crisis.

 On the other hand, Germany was making quick gains in Europe creating domestic as well as international pressure on British to find a political solution for Indian problem to secure their participation in the war.

 In this scenario, Viceroy came up with the August offer-

Dominion status would be given to India after the war.
The Viceroy's Executive Council will be expanded so that eight out of its 12 members would be Indians.

War Advisory Council would be set up to organise the Indian war effort.
A Constituent assembly consisting of primarily Indians would be set up after the war in order to draft a new constitution.

Full weightage would be given to minority opinion and no constitution would be accepted without their consent. No mass movement was launched immediately after the failure of the August offer despite demand from various quarters because-

 Socialists led by SC Bose considered the moment as the opportune one to launch a mass movement against the British colonialism.

 However, Gandhians were not in the favour of launching mass movement because-

unpreparedness of the masses,
poor state of Congress organisation,
Low level of Hindu-Muslim unity.

The August offer was the last opportunity with the British to get wholehearted support of Indians in the war. Its failure was not followed by a mass movement but the Individual Satyagraha definitely created mass discontent.

Q. What were the circumstances behind the Individual Satyagraha? Discuss in light of the ideological debate within the Congress.

Individual Satyagraha was launched by Mahatma Gandhi in 1940 to channelize the anger of Indians against the adamant attitude of British during the Second World War without launching a mass movement in a difficult time.

Circumstances behind Individual Satyagraha

 Unilateral declaration of India's participation in the Second World War by the then Viceroy.

 Congress' opposition to the decision and its resolution condemning British insensitivity towards Indians.

 August offer of Viceroy Linlithgow which proposed Dominion status, increase in participation of Indians in Viceroy's Executive Council, formation of a Constituent assembly post-war, war advisory council with Indian participation among others.

 This proposal was itself not reflective of the demand of nationalists and was even accompanied by an adamant attitude thus raising question on the real intention of the British.

 The failure of the August offer was followed by a significant debate among nationalists regarding the mode of protest.

Socialists argued for launching a mass movement at a time when British were vulnerable.

When the Congress adopted the Ramgarh resolution, SC Bose even floated the idea of a parallel Congress to launch a mass movement. However, the Congress Socialist Party and the Communist Party of India did not agree.

On the other hand, Mahatma Gandhi was not in the favour of a mass struggle because- a) unpreparedness of the masses, b) poor state of Congress organisation, c) Low level of Hindu-Muslim unity.

 Instead, he revealed this programme of Individual Satyagraha with the following objectives-

Restoration of the suspended freedoms
To show that nationalist patience was not due to weakness
To express that Indians were not interested in war and did not differentiate between imperialism and fascism.

To give another opportunity to the government to accept Indian demands peacefully.  Ultimately, Individual Satyagraha was launched in December, 1940 with Acharya Vinoba Bhave, Pt Jawahar Lal Nehru and Brahmadutt being the first three Satyagrahis.

Individual Satyagraha prepared the masses for the final stage of struggle. Widespread popular participation in Quit India Movement and the continuous restlessness in India was a direct consequence of it.

Cripps Proposal Background  In March 1942, Sir Stafford Cripps headed a single member commission with a set of constitutional provisions to seek Indian support for the British war effort.

 Cripps was a labour member of Winston Churchill's Conservative war cabinet.

Previously, Cripps had expressed open sympathy for the Indian national movement and thus was considered the most suitable British politician to rally Indian support.

Factors behind sending the Cripps Mission  It was a symbol of growing Britain's growing desperation as the war had taken a menacing turn in the Pacific theatre. Following the Pearl Harbour raid (7 th December, 1941), the Japanese had quickly overrun whole of South-East Asia forcing the British to rout from Malay, Singapore and Burma. Therefore, Indian support had become crucial.

 Britain was also being pressurized by its allies namely the USA, USSR and China to secure whole-hearted Indian cooperation.

 The Indian leadership had also indicated that it would readily support Britain's war if power was transferred immediately and promise of complete independence after the war was given.

 The Indian leadership seems to be divided. While the Congress had unanimously decided to resign following Governor General Linlithgow's decision to unilaterally declare war on Germany on India's behalf, there was little agreement for the strategy to be followed.

Some Congress leaders wanted to launch a revolt against British rule, others such as C. Rajagopalachari wanted to offer the British an olive branch. By supporting the war effort, they hoped that this would be reciprocated with independence after the war.

While Gandhiji was opposed to any mass movement as it would be morally inconsistent with his support for the war effort, he also declined to openly endorse the war believing that the British were insincere about Indian aspirations.

Ultimately, the Congress appointed Jawahar Lal Nehru and Maulana Azad as their two official negotiators with respect to the Cripps mission.

Jinnah, being the prominent Muslim League leader supported the British war effort unequivocally and criticized the Congress policy. He insisted upon Pakistan and rejected the Congress' call for pan-Indian unity and immediate independence.

Cripps Proposal  India would become a dominion of the British Empire after the end of the war. In other words, dominion status was offered after the war.

 India would have the freedom to decide the nature of its relationship with the United Nations and the British Commonwealth including the right to leave it.

 It provided that a Constituent Assembly would be set up after the war, consisting of only Indians to draft a new Constitution for India.

 It promised that provisions would be made to ensure the participation of Princely states in the Constituent Assembly.

Clarifications- Cripps also made two clarifications

 If no Indian plan could be finalized regarding the mechanism to constitute a Constituent Assembly, then, it would be created through indirect elections from the provincial assemblies.

 Princely states would be represented in the Constituent Assembly by members nominated by the rulers.

Conditions  The provinces would have the right to reject the Constitution and secede from the Indian Union.

 The Constituent Assembly would have to sign treaty with the British government covering all issues arising out of the transfer of power.

Departure from the August Offer  The Cripps Proposal offered India the right to leave the British Commonwealth. This effectively represented a path towards complete independence.

 While the August offer proposed a Constituent Assembly consisting of primarily Indians, the Cripps proposal offered a Constituent Assembly consisting of only Indians. For the first time, the British openly admitted that drafting an Indian Constitution was the exclusive right of Indians.

 Unlike the August offer, there was no over emphasis on minority opinion in the Cripps proposal. This legitimised the Congress' position as the sole representative of all Indians.

 Unlike the August offer, the Cripps proposal outlined a concrete plan to create a Constituent assembly.

 For the first time, the British accepted the geographical unity of India by insisting upon the participation of princely states.

 However, as compared to the August offer, the Cripps proposal made a more direct assault on Indian unity by granting the British Indian provinces the right to self-

determination. This represented the maturing of the idea of British sponsored provincialism in India to weaken the national struggle.

Reasons for the failure of the Cripps Proposal  The Cripps proposal failed to satisfy nationalist aspirations and was unanimously rejected.

 It was merely an orchestrated propaganda event for Soviet, Chinese and American consumption. The British used it to show their allies that they were sincere about the war effort and the need to sacrifice. At the same time, they wanted to provoke the Indians to launch a mass movement and paint them as Japanese and Nazi sympathisers.

 The Congress rejected the Cripps proposal on following grounds-

It proposed dominion status rather than the complete independence that the Congress had been demanding since 1929.

The Congress also objected to the representation of the Princely states by the nominees instead of elected representatives. This was against the idea of popular sovereignty.

The right of self-determination given to the British Indian provinces was a direct assault on Indian unity. The British were directly seeking to delay the transfer of power and derail the national movement.

All the important provisions including the transfer of power, drafting of Constituent assembly were to come into effect after the war. Mahatma Gandhi rejected the proposal commenting that it was a 'post-dated cheque on a failing bank'.

 Muslim League also rejected the Cripps proposal because of the following reasons-

It criticized the idea of a single Indian union.
It also opposed the machinery for setting up the Constituent assembly since it would have favoured Hindus.  The depressed classes also rejected the Cripps proposal on following grounds-

The proposal had no provision to protect their interests.
They feared that secession of Muslim majority areas would leave them at the mercy of the Hindu majority.  Sikhs also rejected the Cripps proposal on the grounds that if Punjab seceded from the union, they would be left at the mercy of the Muslim majority.

 All India Hindu Mahasabha also rejected the proposal on the following grounds-

They criticized the right to self-determination to provinces as it would be a direct attack on the Indian unity.

It also criticized the mechanism for setting up the Constituent assembly through indirect elections by the provincial legislative assemblies which themselves were elected on the basis of separate electorate.

 Cripps also suffered from several other flaws such as-

Cripps did not have much authority to deviate from his opening position. The Cripps proposal was too radical for the British government and too modest for Indians.

Churchill (British PM), Linlithgow (Viceroy) and Leo Amery (Secretary of State for India) repeatedly torpedoed any further negotiations by the Indians and the Cripps resulting in the emergence of a deadlock.

Cripps also insisted that the Cripps proposal were meant to give precise shape to the general terms outlined in the August offer. This resulted in suspicion and low enthusiasm from Indians.

The procedure outlined by the Cripps proposal to secede from the union was not well defined. The decision of secession was to be taken by a resolution in the

provincial legislature with 60% majority. If less than 60% of the members supported it, the decision was too be taken by a plebiscite of adult males in that province through a simple majority. This virtually guaranteed the partition of India and the secession of Muslim majority states such as Punjab, Bengal and Sindh.

The idea behind sending Cripps to India was itself a political one devoid of any genuine concern for India's well-being. Allies were creating pressure on Britain as Germany started making gains. Secondly, Cripps was a Labour party member with left orientation in Churchill's war cabinet. Thus, sending him to India had several political benefits for Churchill-

a) Cripps was sent to India to distance him from the war cabinet.

b) It would show the allies that the British were sincere about securing India support c) Failure would have discredited Cripps and destroyed the allies' sympathy towards Indian.

Practice Question Q. The draft declaration of the Cripps proposal was conservative, reactionary and limited and finally the mission ended in failure. Comment.

As the Second World War took a menacing turn, the British PM Churchill came under growing pressure from the Soviets, the Americans, the Chinese and the Labour Party of Britain to seek active Indian cooperation. Thus, the Cripps mission led by Sir Stafford Cripps was sent to India.

 He was a left wing Labourite minister of Churchill's war cabinet who was openly sympathetic to Indian national movement.

 Although Cripps announced that the aim of the proposal was the earliest possible realisation of self-government in India, the draft declaration that he brought with him was disappointing. It proposed-

Dominion status after the war
A constitution making body after the war whose members would be elected directly by the provincial assemblies and nominated in case of princely states.

The Pakistan demand was accepted indirectly with the provision that any province would have the right to reject the constitution.  The Secretary of State Leo Amery described the declaration as a conservative, reactionary and limited proposal which was meant to implement the provisions of the August offer in precision.

 Mahatma Gandhi rejected the offer as a 'post-dated cheque on a failing bank'.

 All major political parties rejected the Cripps proposal either on the grounds that it did not offer complete independence, none of its provisions were to have immediate effect and because of its flawed mechanism of setting up of the Constituent assembly or due to the right of self-determination given to the provinces or because the proposal indirectly ensured the future partition of India.

 The Indian leadership was also aware of the fact that Cripps had little authority to move beyond the original draft. The British PM, Secretary of State and Governor General remained hostile to the Cripps and repeatedly torpedoed his efforts to negotiate further beyond the draft proposals.

 Therefore, the Cripps proposal was destined to fail. However, failure of the Cripps proposal produced results that were not accepted by the British.

 The British had accepted a peaceful mass movement that could be easily suppressed and that the British will be able to justify their actions to their allies. Instead, the failure of the proposal led to the Quit India movement that accelerated the demise of the British Indian Empire.

Quit India Movement Factors  The Quit India resolution was first adopted by the Congress Working Committee after consultation with Mahatma Gandhi at his Sevagram Satyagraha Ashram, Wardha on 14 th July, 1942. It called for the British to transfer power to Indians immediately and quit India. Failing this, the Congress would launch programme of mass Civil disobedience in order to attain the same.

 However, not all Congress leaders agreed with this proposition.

Prominent leaders such as C. Rajagopalachari, Jawahar Lal Nehru and Maulana Azad felt that the better option would be to whole heartedly support the British in

repelling the future Japanese invasion and in return, the grateful British would reward Indians by accepting their demands.

Further, they believed that the Congress organisation was not strong enough to sustain any mass movement in a disciplined manner.

Lastly, they felt that the Japanese were the worse oppressors than the British and thus it was in the interests of the Indians to help the British resist them. On the other hand, Mahatma Gandhi received unequal and enthusiastic support from other leaders such as Sardar Patel, Dr Rajendra Prasad and Dr Anugraha Narayan Sinha in his call of Quit India.

 Mahatma Gandhi had decided to give the call for Quit India at a time when severe British repression was a guarantee due to the following factors-

Failure of the Cripps mission had exposed the unchanged attitude of the British with regards to Constitutional advance and had made it clear that any further silence would be tantamount to accepting that the British had the right to unilaterally determine India's future without consulting Indians.

There was a great degree of public unrest due to- a) Price rise and shortages of essential commodities such as foodgrains, sugar,

salt and cloth caused by a strict regime of rationing and diversion of supplies towards the war efforts by the British. The British had started forcibly confiscating rice surpluses from the poor farmers of Bengal and Odisha in order to supply Australian, British and American troops in Indonesia and Burma. Food shortage in East India was quickly reaching a critical point making a major famine unavoidable.

b) The seizing of fishing boats in Bengal and Orissa by the British threatened the livelihoods and lives of the poor and populous coastal communities of this region. The British had done this in order to prevent the Japanese from using these boats in any future invasion of East India. The island communities of the Sundarbans delta had been stranded and condemned to a future of starvation and death.

c) There was also a great degree of fear among the people of Eastern India that the British would adopt a scorched Earth policy in Assam and Bengal in order to delay Japanese invasion of India.

As a result, like the collapse of the British and French Empires in South-East Asia, collapse of the British Indian Empire also seemed imminent. Indians had no faith in

the stability of the British Empire and did not feel that it would be able to defend Indians against Japanese invasion. Public trust on the stability of the government was so low that the people had even started withdrawing their deposits from the banks and Post offices and instead had started converting their wealth to gold and silver. As a result of the erosion of the public confidence, the masses were bursting with the anticipation of the British collapse and were ready to give expression to their long standing discontent with British rule.

The manner in which the British had retreated from Malay, Singapore and Burma after being routed by an Asian power had destroyed the British aura of invincibility.

The mighty British Empire looked vulnerable and the Indian masses were emboldened to challenge it directly. Further, the British had also left their subjects in these South-East Asia colonies to their own defenses and had given preferential treatment to European over Indians while evacuating (separate white and black rows were demarcated for evacuating whites and Indians). This exposed the racist tendencies of the British rulers. Indians became increasingly certain that the British would not hesitate to repeat their performance if Japan invades India.

Beginning of the spread of the movement  Quit India Movement was official launched on 8 th August 1942, when the All India Congress Committee endorsed the Quit India resolution in its meeting at the Gowalia Tank Maidan in Bombay. The Congress resolved to-

Demand an immediate end of British rule in India.
Declare commitment of free India to defend itself against all types of fascism and imperialism.

Form a provisional government after withdrawal.
Sanction a mass movement of civil disobedience against British rule.
Name Mahatma Gandhi as the leader of the struggle.

 Mahatma Gandhi followed the resolution by directly addressing the masses and while he urged the masses to remain non-violent, he also gave the masses the mantra of this new phase of struggle. He said 'I give to you a mantra, it is a short one. You may imprint it in your hearts and give expression to it with every breath. The mantra is do or die. We will either free India or die in the attempt. We shall not live to see the perpetuation of our slavery. He also issued general instructions to different sections of the population.

To the peasants, he said that if zamindars are anti-government, pay mutually agreed rent and if zamindars are pro-government, do not pay rent.

Workers; if factory owners are anti-government, do not go on strike. If they are pro- government, go on strike.

Students; if confident, leave studies and join the struggle.
Government employees; do not resign but declare your allegiance to the Congress.
Princes; support the masses and accept the sovereignty of your people.
Masses of the princely states; support your ruler only if he is anti-government and declare yourselves to be part of the Indian nation.

Soldiers; do not leave the army but don't fire on your compatriots.

 While Mahatma Gandhi urged the masses to remain non-violent, he seemed to be in a much more radical mood as compared to earlier. In the buildup towards the Quit India Movement, Mahatma Gandhi had anticipated that the movement could be extremely violent. In a series of articles and interviews, he had clarified his position on non-

violence.

He explained that violence was acceptable in certain circumstances such as immediate bodily defence against a murderer and a rapist.

He further explained that British would be directly responsible for any Indian violence. Hence, violence by Indians would only be in response to British aggression and violence.

He also assured the masses that he would not waiver in his support for their struggle even if there is large scale outbreak of violence and asked the masses to act in accordance with their conscience.

 Following the do or die speech, the movement had started officially.

 The government was not willing to let the movement take off and thus early in the morning of 9 th August, 1942, Gandhiji alongwith all top Congress leaders were arrested.

The movement was rendered leaderless and the government expected that this would prevent the Quit India Movement from taking root. However, contrary to British expectations, the sudden arrest of the Congress leaders resulted in a massive outpouring of public sympathy and spontaneous protests erupted in all major cities including Pune, Surat, Ahmedabad, Lahore, Multan, Delhi, Lucknow, Patna, Calcutta, Madras etc.

 Without the guidance of the leadership, the spontaneous movement of the people took unique forms as the masses began attacking all symbols of the British regime.

 At Patna, students led a flag agitation and were shot at when they tried to raise the Indian tricolor atop the Patna Secretariat resulting in the deaths of 7 school children on 11 th August, 1942. Following this, the movement became extremely violent and spread to the villages in Bihar, UP, Bengal, Orissa, CP and Maharashtra. It remained out of control for several months and in vast areas British authority virtually disappeared.

 The army was called in resulting in more than ninety thousand arrests and over twenty two thousand deaths.

Mass activity almost came to an end by early 1943 but the movement continued through organisation of underground activity.

Leaders such as JP Narayan, Ram Manohar Lohiya, Aruna Asaf Ali, Usha Mehta etc. emerged as leaders of the underground movement. In the forests of Nepal, UP and

Bihar, JP Narayan organised a guerilla outfit named the Azad Dasta. It made bombs, blasted bridges, disrupted communications, toppled telegraph poles and broke prisons. Similar activities were undertaken in North India by Ram Manohar Lohia assisted by Aruna Asaf Ali.

Usha Mehta operated a secret Congress radio for several months with the assistance of other nationalists before she was discovered and arrested.  The nationalists also succeeded in establishing parallel governments on a temporary basis after the collapse of British administration in some areas.

In Balia, it was organised under Chittu Pandey and lasted for a week
At Tamluk, parallel government was organised under Sumant Sarkar lasting for almost two years. It undertook cyclone relief work, constructed and funded schools, distributed paddy among the poor after confiscating it from the rich and organised armed bands known as Bidyut Bahinis. It maintained law and order as well as resisted British rule.

At Satara, parallel government known as the Prati Sarkar was organised under leader such as YB Chavan and Nana Patil. It lasted for two years and organised village libraries, arbitration courts known as Nyaya Mandals, prohibition drives and Gandhian marriages without dowry.

Mass activity and extent of participation  The masses emerged as the strength of the movement. The leaders had been arrested and communication between the leadership and the masses was prevented. In such a scenario, masses acted spontaneously to resist British rule and made the independence of India an immediate objective.

 Different sections of the population participated in different ways.

Businessmen provided active support through donations, shelter and material help.
Students acted as couriers for revolutionaries.
Simple villagers resisted the British by refusing them information.
Locomotive pilots and train drivers participated by transporting revolutionaries and bombs along with other material.

Government officials including the police passed on secret information to activists.
Women participated both in the open and underground movements.
Muslims did not participate directly in large numbers but helped by giving shelter to underground activists. There were no communal clashes during the Quit India Movement.

Peasants participated by attacking symbols of British authority such as government buildings, Police thanas, railway tracks, post offices, law courts etc. surprising was the lack of any anti-Zamindari activities.

While the communists had condemned the Quit India Movement, they were unable to resist the pull of the strong anti-imperialist struggle. Opposition to the Quit India Movement The Quit India Movement was unable to elicit the support of many political parties.

 The Hindu Mahasabha opposed the Quit India Movement since it was a Congress led movement which was considered by the Mahasabha to be a minority appeaser. Further, the decision to oppose the movement was also based on the grounds of practical politics.

In Bengal, the Hindu Mahasabha had joined the Muslim League's cabinet with Dr SP Mookherjee as Home Minister. He used this position to suppress the Quit India

Movement since he felt that it threatened the Hindu interests in a Muslim majority province.

 All India Muslim League also opposed the Quit India Movement. Jinnah condemned the Congress policy of launching a mass movement against the British at a time when Britain was fighting for survival. Muslim League gave the call for Muslims to support the British war effort and Muslims joined the army in large numbers.

Following the resignation of the Congress, Muslim League also came in control of the Muslim majority provinces of Assam, Bengal, Sindh, Punjab and the NWFP.

It did not want to lose control in these provinces since the League's rule of these provinces was considered essential to legitimise its two-nation theory. Jinnah felt that the immediate transfer of power was not in the interests of Muslims. Instead, India should be partitioned first and only then become independent.

 The Communist Part of India opposed the Quit India Movement since it did not want any struggle against a Soviet ally during the Second World War.

 The All India Kisan Sabha also opposed the Quit India Movement since its leaders felt that the Congress was a Zamindar sympathiser.

 The majority of the Indian princes also strongly opposed Quit India Movement. They feared the loss of their sovereignty following the collapse of British Paramountcy. Thus, they actively supported the British by providing them military and material help. They also actively cooperated with British to suppress the Quit India Movement.

Significance of Quit India Movement  Masses had become fully committed to the idea of complete independence by this time.

They were ready to go to extreme lengths to attain it.
This demonstrated the rising radicalism of the Indian National Movement and signalled that the British could not depend upon any cooperation from the ordinary Indians in the future.

Thus, the only option for the British was to quit India.  The British government employees had also actively supported the movement.

This was the final nail in the coffin of the British Raj.
It made the end of British rule a certainty and the next agenda for the British became the transfer of power.  The armed forces also began displaying the symptoms of nationalism and anti-

imperialism.

The establishment of the Indian National Army and its lengthy campaign in Burma and the North-East Frontier, INA trials and the Royal Indian Naval Mutiny in February 1946 was the direct result of the Quit India Movement.

It displayed an important role in inducing an unprecedented level of urgency among the British with regards to the question of transfer of power.

 The Quit India Movement also changed the fortunes of the Muslim League.

It came in control of all Muslim majority provinces and gained immense popularity among Indian Muslims through its policies.

All India Muslim League came on par with the Congress which was proved in the elections of 1945-46 when Muslim League secured majority in all the Muslim majority provinces whereas Congress won majority in all the Hindu majority provinces.

In the future, any discussion regarding transfer of power and setting up the constitutional arrangement for free India would not take place without the League's approval.

As a result, a Constitutional deadlock had emerged between the Muslim League and the Congress. The failure to resolve this deadlock ultimately led to the partition of India alongwith independence.

Constitutional deadlock The Quit India had made it clear that the days of British rule in India were numbered.

Therefore, the next step would be to transfer power to an interim government of Indians till complete independence with a working constitution to be attained.

 However this task was hardly straightforward. Muslim League had been one of the greatest political beneficiaries of the Second World War and the Quit India Movement.

It had gained power in the Muslim majority provinces after the Congress' resignation in 1939.

The League had gained popular support in the Muslim majority areas with the combination of pro-Muslim policies and communally divisive rhetoric.

Essentially, the League had been able to transform Pakistan demand into popular demand for a sizeable section of Indian Muslims.

Further, the League had played leading role in encouraging the Muslim youth to join the British army in large numbers.

 As such, the League and its demands could not be easily brushed aside. It was clear that progress towards the transfer of power and complete independence would not be possible without a consensus between the Congress and Muslim League.

 This set the stage for the emergence of constitutional deadlock between the Congress and the League. It revolved around fundamental constitutional questions.

Indian National Congress Muslim League Nature of the Union Single Union Two separate Unions Nature of the Federation Strong Centre Weak Centre Minority Responsibility Congress claimed to represent all Indians including Muslims.

It claimed itself as the exclusive representative of Indian Muslims.

It rejected Minority veto as well as Special representation.

It supported Universal Adult Franchise It supported Minority veto and special representation to Muslims including Separate Electorates. It argued in favour of reservation for Muslims in excess of population.

 It was important to resolve this deadlock so that progress on the transfer of power could take place. Over 1944-45, separate Indian attempts were made to resolve the deadlock through -

CR Formula/ Rajaji Formula (1944)
Desai-Liaqat Pact (1945) CR Formula/ Rajaji Formula  Proposed by the veteran Congress leader C. Rajagopalachari, it is considered to be a tacit acceptance of Pakistan. It proposed-

League should endorse the Congress' demand for complete independence. An interim government could be set up at the Centre with equal representation from both the League and the Congress.

After the complete transfer of power, a special commission would be set up to demarcate the Muslim majority areas of North-Western and North-Eastern India by

identifying the districts where Muslims were in majority. It would also divide the border districts into Hindu and Muslim majority areas. A plebiscite would be conducted in the Muslim majority areas in which all the residents of those areas would vote regarding whether or not to create Pakistan.

In case of partition, common essential services such as defence, communication, commerce, currency, external affairs etc. would be administered by a common centre. Further, the centre would have special powers with respect to holding the integrity of the constitutional machinery in the provinces.

Border districts would be partitioned. Muslim majority areas will merge with Pakistan and Hindu majority areas will merge with India.

All the provisions would come into effect only after complete transfer of power. Gandhi-Jinnah talks (September, 1944)

 Mahatma Gandhi was released from captivity in May, 1944.

 Quit India Movement had slowed down and the government was seeking the cooperation of the Congress to formulate mechanism for transfer of power.

 War had also swung in favour of Britain and thus the British could afford to release Gandhi.

Britain's war allies namely USSR and the USA were mounting pressure on her to liberate India.

 Gandhi wanted quick resolution of the constitutional deadlock between the Congress and Muslim League. As such, he proposed round of direct talks between himself and Jinnah. Jinnah agreed and the Gandhi-Jinnah talk took place in September, 1944.

 However, talks failed to ease the deadlock and Gandhi was forced to admit the failure of the negotiations. The talks failed due to the following reasons-

Gandhi and Jinnah interpreted partition in very different ways. For Gandhi, it represented separation within the household. He insisted upon a common centre to regulate important subjects. On the other hand, Jinnah interpreted partition as a complete break with full sovereignty for the newly created country of Pakistan.

Jinnah also objected to the participation of Hindus in the plebiscite proposed by the CR formula. He argued that since Pakistan demand was an exclusively Muslim demand, only Muslims should have the right to vote.

Jinnah also objected the district-wise demarcation of Muslim majority areas. This would have meant partition of Punjab and Bengal which had a number of Hindu majority districts.

Jinnah also objected the emergency powers proposed for the centre with respect to breakdown of constitutional machinery in the states. He felt that this threatened the autonomy of the Muslim majority provinces.

 Gandhi could not overcome these objections. The biggest sticking point was the dispute regarding the proposed plebiscite.

By accepting Jinnah's demand that only Muslims should decide whether or not to create Pakistan, Gandhi would have accepted the two-nation theory and he was not ready to concede this.

Desai-Liaqat Pact (1945)

 In May 1945, the Governor General Wavell proposed a conference with all prominent parties and leaders in order to prepare a roadmap for the creation of an interim government.

 As such, resolution of constitutional deadlock between the Congress and League became important.

 Desai-Liaqat pact between the Congress leader Bhulabhai Desai and the Muslim League leader Liaqat Ali Khan was an attempt to do the same.

 Unlike the CR formula, Desai-Liaqat pact did not have specific proposals with respect to partition or constitutional future of India.

Instead, it was a limited pact that aligned general vision of the two parties with respect to composition of interim government that Wavell was proposing.

The two leaders proposed that Congress and the League would have equal representation in the interim government.

 Mahatma Gandhi alongwith the Congress leaders approved this pact. It was a continuation of the policy proposed by the CR formula.

 Jinnah also gave his approval to the pact but the constitutional deadlock could not be resolved.

This was because Jinnah insisted that Congress could not nominate any Muslim members in the interim cabinet. He claimed that the Muslim League as the sole representative of the Indian Muslims had the exclusive right to nominate Muslim ministers.

 This condition was not acceptable to the Congress. It could have reduced the Congress to a caste Hindu party and validated the League's claim that it was the only legitimate representative of Indian Muslims.

Practice Question Q. Shed light on the constitutional deadlock that emerged in Indian politics following the Quit India Movement. What were the principles on the basis of which Jinnah prevented the easing of this deadlock?

The beginning of a constitutional deadlock between the Congress and the League could be seen from the first effort of Indians to form a constitution in 1928 in the form of Motilal Nehru. Fundamental ideological differences took an even firm shape in 1940 s.

 Nature of the union- While the Congress was in the favour of a single union, League supported two separate Unions with one catering to the needs of Muslim majority provinces.

 Nature of Federalism- Congress supported a strong centre to maintain a united nation but League demanded a weak centre with strong provinces so as to strengthen its own position.

 Minority responsibility

While Congress claimed to represent whole India including Muslims, League claimed itself as the exclusive representative of the Muslims.

Congress rejected minority veto and special representation to any community. League asked for special representation for Muslims including separate electorates and supported minority veto.

Congress talked in favour of Universal Adult Franchise whereas Muslim League demanded special reservation to Muslims in excess of their population.

Jinnah created constant obstacles in the efforts to break this deadlock on the following principles

 Two-nation theory- the idea of Hindus and Muslims as two separate nations was very strong and Muslim League was concerned about the minority status of Muslims in a single nation.

 Minority veto- this led Jinnah to claim veto for minority community- special representation in excess of their population, separate electorates, no interference in political, social or religious affairs of Muslims without their permission.

 In any case of plebiscite regarding formation of Pakistan, as suggested by Rajaji formula, only Muslims should be allowed to vote.

 Jinnah also objected the district-wise demarcation of Muslim majority areas. This would have meant partition of Punjab and Bengal which had a number of Hindu majority districts.

 Jinnah also objected the emergency powers proposed for the centre with respect to breakdown of constitutional machinery in the states. He felt that this threatened the autonomy of the Muslim majority provinces.

 During Simla Conference as well, Muslim League was adamant that any Muslim member to the Viceroy's Executive Council should only be nominated by the League.

The constitutional deadlock was ripening of the British seed of 'divide and rule'. When Jinnah's adamancy and British intentions joined hands, the nation observed communal riots throughout its territory leading ultimately to independence with the partition.

Shimla Conference and the Wavell Plan (June 1945)

 In April 1945, all prominent Congress leaders including Nehru, Sardar Patel and Maulana Azad were released.

 In May 1945, he proposed a conference with Indian leaders at Shimla to outline the terms of transferring power of Indians and creating a mechanism for the drafting of a constitution for independent India.

Desai-Liaqat Pact was finalised to outline the shared vision of League and the Congress with respect to the interim government but it failed to resolve the constitutional deadlock.

 In June 1945, twenty one leaders including Nehru, Patel, Azad and Jinnah met at Shimla where Wavell proposed a plan to transfer power and enumerate the terms for the basis of India's future constitutional development.

 The Wavell Plan proposed-

Dominion status would be granted to India
An interim government would be established immediately by reconstituting the Governor General's Executive Council.

a) Except for the Governor General and Commander-in-chief, all other members would be Indian.

b) Wavell proposed that interim government would be constituted by total of sixteen councilors including Governor General and Commander-in-chief who would be British and fourteen Indians out of which there would be five

Councilors each from Hindus and Muslims and one Councillor each from Sikhs, Anglo-Indians, depressed classes and Punjab.

c) A Constituent assembly would be established consisting of only Indians to draft a constitution for India. It would have the freedom to decide India's constitutional future either as a dominion of the British Empire or as a fully sovereign independent nation.

 Before any specifics with respect to Constituent assembly, its composition or mandate would be finalised, the talks broke down on the question of minority representation in the interim government.

 Jinnah once again insisted that all the Muslim members of the interim government must come exclusively from the Muslim League.

 Understandably, the Congress rejected this demand.

 Instead of trying to bridge the gap between the two sides, Wavell widened the gap and then suddenly called off the conference. He declared that the conference had failed because of Jinnah's objections.

 This virtually handed a veto to Jinnah and the Muslim League.

 No future scheme of constitutional development could succeed without the approval of the Muslim League.

 While there is no consensus among historians regarding the strategy adopted by Wavell, following observations have been made-

Wavell harboured personal and professional resentment against the Congress. As a military general, he felt that Quit India Movement had directly contributed to prolonging the war which played a direct role in the decline of Britain as the pre-

eminent global power.

Wavell was interested in the partition of India. He expected the future government of Pakistan would be a British ally and a strategic partner in the strategically important Indian Ocean region.

Further, he felt that League must be rewarded for its loyalty during the war.
If the League's demands were ignored, sympathetic Muslim soldiers may rebel leading to a complete breakdown of authority and a civil war.

Congress led united India would definitely lean left bringing it closer to the Soviet Union.

Thus, Pakistan may serve as the bastion of capitalism in South Asia.

Indian National Army Movement  The INA was an armed force composed of Indian Prisoners of war raised in 1943 by Ras Behari Bose. He established Indian Independence League in 1942 as an overseas revolutionary wing.

 INA was formed at Singapore with Japanese help by inducting those Prisoners of war of British Indian army who were captured by Japanese while they conquered Singapore and Malay from British.

 The feeling of anti-imperialism was already very strong in India because of the following reasons-

During World War 2, Indian soldiers were left behind during retreat by the British.
The failure of the Cripps proposal and the rigid attitude of British government exposed the futility of constitutional negotiations.

 Indian Prisoners of war realised that it would be better to join the Japanese in countering British rule rather than falling into their hands as prisoners of war since Japanese were known for their mistreatment of Prisoners of war.

 Leadership of SC Bose- After parting ways from Congress in the aftermath of dispute regarding the course of action to be adopted against the British after their unilateral declaration making India a party to the Second World War, he established Forward Bloc.

Thereafter, he violated his house arrest and met Mussolini (Italy), Hitler (Germany) and Tojo (Japanese Premier). After Tojo's support, he was the natural leader of the INA.

 Revolutionary activity was already quite high in Singapore and even Indian Prisoners of war were influenced by it. They readily decided to serve Indian cause when Ras Behari Bose through his Indian Independence League established INA.

 SC Bose reached Singapore in 1943 and took charge of the INA. The battalions of the INA were named after the major leaders-

Gandhi battalion
Nehru battalion
Azad battalion
Subhash battalion
Rani Lakshmi Bai battalion  Indian officers who were earlier serving as the officers of the British army were appointed Commanders of the battalions.

 Beginning in 1944, the Indian National Army and the Imperial Japanese Army began campaign to invade India from the North East. The campaign began in Burma from the easternmost stretch to the eastern part of North-East India mainly Nagaland and Manipur.

The most crucial moment of the campaign was the siege of Imphal.
However, the siege failed because the end of the war in Europe had taken place and thus the allies had turned their attention towards Japan.

Through series of allied naval expeditions, the fighting strength of the Imperial Japanese Navy was destroyed.

Within a short span of time, Japan lost control of its overseas colonies.
Thus, the INA soldiers fighting on the outskirts of Imphal faced severe shortage of men and material further compounding the crisis.

 Thousands of INA soldiers and officers were captured and court-martials were set up under the Army Act, 1911 with charges including-

Murder
Abetment to murder
Torture of Prisoners of war
Waging war against the Emperor - high treason.  INA heroes faced-

Dishonourable discharge
Withholding of pensions
Imprisonment
Deportation
Death penalty Red Fort Trials  The trials of INA soldiers took place at Red fort.

 The first trial was of three officers- Prem Kumar Sehgal, Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon and Shah Nawaz Khan (interestingly including a Hindu, Sikh and a Muslim).

 The nationalist leadership hailed these officers as patriots and heroes.

Congress constituted a defence committee of prominent lawyers including JL Nehru, Kailashnath Katju, Tej Bahadur Sapru, Bhulabhai Desai and Asaf Ali to defend them.

In the election campaign, both the Congress and the Muslim League promised that these heroes will be provided just treatment as patriots and not as traitors.

 In the trial, the British military judges held the heroes culpable for treason. They dismissed them, withheld their commissions, and passed a sentence deporting them for seven years of rigorous imprisonment in the cellular jail.

 As a response, there were huge demonstrations in the winter of 1945-46. The overall atmosphere was that of a violent public mood with several upsurges being followed-

18 th November, 1945 in Calcutta where students from Youth Congress, SFI (Communist Party's student wing), and the Muslim League organised a general strike prompting the police to fire on them, using lathicharge etc. to suppress the upsurge.

11 th February, 1946 at Calcutta- another upsurge led by students against the 7 years' sentence given to Captain Rashid Ali of the INA.

18 th February, 1946 in Bombay- Royal Indian Naval mutiny by ratings in Bombay was the most startling one among these. Royal Indian Naval Mutiny The Indian sailors aboard the HMIS Talwar went on a general strike due to the following factors-

 INA trials

 Arrest of some sailors for scrawling the 'Quit India' across the ship  The poor quality of food that was provided to the sailors  The abuse met out daily to the soldiers by superior officers  The use of Indian soldiers in Indonesia to win back French colony.

Impact  The revolt by the naval sailors had a liberating effect on the masses. It led to spontaneous uprisings in Bombay by students, government functionaries, workers, shopkeepers and women.

 Naval establishments at Karachi, Kochi and Calcutta also felt the effects of the uprisings.

 The masses also responded across India resulting in the emergence of spontaneous protests even in the far off places such as Baluchistan, Punjab, Sindh, Assam and South India.

 The Royal Indian Air force was also affected by the mutiny. Airmen at Pathankot and Ambala also went on strike.

British Response  Violent suppression of the rebellious elements of the armed forces with the use of the loyal elements.

 They used the threat of aerial bombardment to force the sailors to lay down their arms.

 Suspension of the INA trials indefinitely.

 Commuting the sentence of convicted INA officers.

 Demobilization of Indian troops in Indonesia and other parts of South East Asia.

Response of the Indian leadership  Sardar Patel travelled to Bombay and met the sailors. He persuaded them to lay down their arms, return to barracks and end the mutiny. He assured the sailors that the political leaders would protect them from administrative action.

 Jinnah also repeated the assurance in Calcutta.

 Aruna Asaf Ali enthusiastically supported the mutiny and the mass uprising had accompanied it.

 Left leaning parties like Forward Bloc and the Communist Party of India also supported the revolt of soldiers, workers and peasants. For communists, it was the beginning of the workers revolt.

 Mahatma Gandhi condemned the mutiny and uprising. He was supported by other leaders such as JL Nehru, Maulana Azad, Sardar Patel and even Jinnah.

Factors for their opposition to the RIN mutiny and mass uprisings  It threatened to derail the process of transfer of power.

 It threatened to permanently politicize India's armed forces.

 It threatened national unity.

 Mahatma Gandhi even admonished Aruna Asaf Ali for supporting unguided spontaneous revolt.

Aftermath  The sailors were honourably discharged.

 No prosecutions were started against them.

 Wavell, Nehru and Jinnah agreed not to enroll the mutinous sailors and INA veterans into the army.

 British PM Clement Atlee declared his intention to set up a Cabinet Mission.

Significance  The British would no longer rely upon the support of its armed forces. A new sense of urgency gripped the British with regards to the 'Indian question'. This urgency was reflected in the response of the British in setting up Cabinet mission.

 At a time when the nation was deeply divided along communal lines, the INA movement raised the hopes for religious unity.

However, this unity did not have the potential to prevent partition. Congress and Communists enjoyed the support of non-Muslims soldiers while Muslim soldiers overwhelmingly supported the Muslim League.

This division was also visible in the general population.
Elections were organised in the Central Legislative assembly and Provincial legislative assemblies in 1945-46. Out of 102 seats in the Central legislative assembly, Congress won 57 seats and Muslim League secured all the seats reserved for the Muslims i.e. 30 seats.

Congress secured 91.1% of the non-Muslims vote whereas the Muslim League secured 86.60% of the Muslim vote thus proving the communal polarization of the Indian society.

Among Muslim majority provinces, Muslim League won Sindh and Bengal; Assam and NWFP were won by Congress and Punjab was ruled by a coalition of Akali dal, Congress and Unionist party with Khizr Hayat Khan as the Premier (despite Muslim League being the single largest party).

 The INA movement also resulted in the emergence of strong popular uprisings across India such as the Tebhaga movement, the Telangana revolt of peasants, the Malabar uprisings, and uprisings of peasants in Baluchistan etc.

These were reflections of the radical mood of people who had been violently suppressed since the Quit India movement. It was also an expression of the emerging class struggle in Indian politics.

Cabinet Mission Plan (1946)

 British PM Clement Atlee declared from the floor of the House of Commons in February, 1946 that his majesty's government wished to setup a Cabinet Mission to prepare the stage for India's independence.

 The House of Common setup the mission in March 1946 with 3 members-

Pethick Lawrence (Secretary of State for India)
AV Alexander (first Lord of the Admiralty)
Sir Stafford Cripps (British minister of Trade and Labour)  On 16 th May 1946, the mission presented its Cabinet Mission Plan-

It rejected the idea of partition and denied the demand for Pakistan arguing that the demographic complexity rendered it almost impossible. In the north east, non- Muslim minority consisted 48% of the total population. In the North West, non-

Muslim minority was 38% of the total population.

Secondly, economic division of resources on communal lines was neither absolutely possible nor feasible.

The partition would have rendered the communication infrastructure useless.
The basis of communal statehood was inapplicable in India due to its large diversity.
The division of the armed forces may have resulted in a civil war and thus the demand for Pakistan was outrightly rejected.

Pethick Lawrence said that the interests of the minorities would be protected but this does not mean that the minority would be allowed to derail the progress of the majority.

This effectively withdrew the minority veto handed over by Wavell to Jinnah.  According to several historians such as Bipan Chandra and Ayesha Jalal, while the Cabinet Mission Plan rejected the form of Pakistan, it granted the effect of Pakistan.

This interpretation is based on the critical analysis of the cabinet mission plans' main proposals-

 A constituent assembly would be set up consisting of indirectly elected members from the provincial legislative assemblies and nominated members from the princely states.

 The provinces would be divided into three groups-

Group A- Hindu majority- UP, Bihar, Central Provinces, Orissa, Bombay, Madras
Group B- Muslim majority (North West) - Punjab, Sindh and the NWFP
Group C- Muslim majority (North East) - Assam and Bengal.  Cabinet Mission Plan is based on a loose federation of Indian provinces and princely states. It consisted of a three level federation-

Federal level
Group level Three separate constitutions for each level
Provincial level  Constituent assembly would be divided into three sections in which each section would draft their group constitutions and constitution of their provinces sitting separately.

 The Federal executive would control only a few subjects of national importance such as defence, diplomacy, currency, commerce, communications etc.

 All other powers would be controlled by the state governments.

 Residuary powers would lie with the states.

 All members of constituent assembly would join the federal constitution.

 An interim government would be formed by reconstituting the Governor General's Executive Council. All governments would be Indians except the Governor General.

 Provinces would have the right to leave their groups after the first general elections.

Further, the federal constitution would be ratified at intervals of ten years by all provinces.

Princely states could join either Indian federation or become part of the British Empire.

Indian response  Jinnah and the All India Muslim League gave approval to the plan as it has given tacit acceptance to the demand of partition despite outrightly rejecting its creation.

It proposed a pathway for the creation of Pakistan.
Ayesha Jalal says that Jinnah's approval was a face saving act as he knew that the demand for Pakistan was unfeasible and thus approving the Cabinet Mission Plan was the next best option.

Further, Jinnah was apprehensive that the creation of Pakistan would have been accompanied by the partition of Punjab, Bengal and Assam.

 In June 1946, Congress Working Committee met at Delhi under the chairmanship of Jawahar Lal Nehru where he withheld his approval to form an interim government. He only agreed to the portions of the Constituent assembly while rejecting the grouping clause of the plan.

He insisted that grouping clause was not necessary. He insisted that grouping clause was not complete and that the provinces should have the right to leave their groups immediately.

Nehru felt that compulsory grouping would decide the fates of Congress ruled Assam and NWFP to the Muslim League. Government's response  Wavell introduced a Breakdown Plan to pressurize the Congress to accept the Cabinet Mission Plan and form an interim government.

 It proposed that British should withdraw to the Muslim majority provinces handing over the rest of the country to the Congress.

 The Breakdown plan was suggestive of-

British helplessness
British desire to create Northern Ireland in India.  The government remained silent with regards to grouping clause.

 The Congress interpreted this to mean that grouping clause was not compulsory and in August, 1946 gave its approval to the Cabinet Mission Plan.

Following this, the League withdrew its approval to the Cabinet Mission Plan.  Jinnah declared that Muslims would have to act directly to obtain Pakistan.

16 th August 1946 was declared as the Direct Action Day. Muslim masses came to the streets in large numbers with green flags and the slogans 'Ladke lenge Pakistan' and 'Leke Rahenge Pakistan'.

 Political and community leaders gave inciting speeches resulting in violent confrontation with the police.

In Bengal, the Premier Hasan Suhrawardi restrained the police from suppressing the mob.

Large scale communal violence spread from Bengal to engulf the whole of North India.

 In the meanwhile, Congress was invited to form the interim government.

 Jinnah rejected the Nehru's invitation to join the government on the ground that Congress had nominated Zakir Hussain, a Muslim leader to the cabinet.

 However, other factors were also at play vis-à-vis Jinnah's rejection-

Direct Action movement was already going on.
Nehru and Jinnah both wanted to head the interim government.
Joining the interim government would have meant that the League was accepting the Congress' position on the grouping clause.  In December 1946, British government clarified that the grouping clause was compulsory.

However, the Congress rejected this clarification and insisted that provinces had the right to leave their groups immediately.

On the other hand, Jinnah approved the Cabinet Mission Plan and the League joined the interim government. This time he accepted the plan for following reasons- a) Government had accepted his position b) He wanted to disrupt the interim government from within.

 Ultimately, the Cabinet Mission Plan was rendered unworkable setting the stage for the Mountbatten Plan which prepared the blueprint for India's independence and partition.