Chapter 7 PDF: India's Struggle for Independence - PDF

Outbreak of WWII and British Declaring India at War (1939) - Date: 3 September 1939 - Event: Viceroy Lord Linlithgow declared India at war with Germany alongside Britain. - Reaction: Congress ministries in provinces resigned in protest, viewing this as high-handed imperialism. - Muslim League's Resp...

Outbreak of WWII and British Declaring India at War (1939) - Date: 3 September 1939 - Event: Viceroy Lord Linlithgow declared India at war with Germany alongside Britain. - Reaction: Congress ministries in provinces resigned in protest, viewing this as high-handed imperialism. - Muslim League's Response: Took advantage of Congress’s absence, passing the Pakistan Resolution in March 1940, demanding independent Muslim states. - Backdrop for 1940s Crises: These developments set the stage for WWII-related tensions, Congress's final non-cooperation movement, Muslim nationalism, and ultimately the partition of India in 1947. Consequences of British Actions and Congress Resignation -Tactical Blunder: British declaration alienated Indian support and triggered resignation of Congress ministries. - Congress Decision: Resignation catalyzed negotiations and civil disobedience, culminating in the August 1942 uprising. - Shift from Collaboration: Pre-1939, there had been some positive signs of a peaceful transfer of power, but the war changed the dynamics entirely, as the British needed India's resources and manpower for the war. Wartime Dynamics and India's Strategic Importance - Indian Army Expansion: Grew tenfold to support British Middle Eastern and South-East Asian campaigns. - Economic Impact: British depleted investments in India; by war’s end, India held £1,000 million in sterling balances. - British Crisis and Congressional Leverage: As Britain’s military setbacks mounted (e.g., fall of France, Singapore, and Burma), Congress saw an opportunity to press for power transfer. Negotiations with the British (1939-1942) - Congress’s Position: Willing to support the war if substantial power was transferred to Indians. - British Response: Britain sought to appease Congress while keeping control; offered increasingly better terms with each military crisis. - Stafford Cripps Mission (April 1942): - Proposal: Britain offered postwar independence and immediate increased Indian involvement in governance. - Conditions: Independence would follow war’s end, with autonomy to any province that did not wish to join the new state. - Outcome: Cripps’ mission failed due to mistrust, with key figures like Churchill and Gandhi rejecting the terms. The "Quit India" Movement (1942) - Trigger: Collapse of negotiations with Cripps; Congress’s desperation for immediate independence. - Nature of Movement: - Independence Push: Launched in August 1942, the "Quit India" movement sought immediate British withdrawal.  - Gandhi’s Role: Gandhi could not lead directly (jailed), but previously hinted that fighting was better than cowardice. - Movement's Course: Quickly turned violent and chaotic, with local leaders, students, and peasants leading attacks. - *lKey Regions: Bombay (initial strikes and police clashes), spread to rural UP, Bihar, and Bengal, with peasant uprisings and attacks on infrastructure. The Scale and Impact of the Quit India Movement - Destruction of Infrastructure: Widespread attacks on railway stations, telegraphs, and government buildings. - Bihar: Cut off from rest of India with extensive infrastructure damage. - UP and Bengal: Government collapsed in areas; "national government" established briefly in Midnapur, Bengal. - British Response: Mobilised 50 battalions; the movement was suppressed within six weeks, with remaining guerilla resistance in isolated areas. Legacy of the Quit India Movement - Suppression and Detention: Congress leaders detained until war's end. - Symbolic Significance: Despite suppression, Quit India became a legendary moment symbolizing idealism and resistance. - Heroes of 1942: Figures like Jayaprakash Narayan, who set up a "provisional government" on the Nepal border, emerged. - Diverse Perspectives: Some police and civil servants later recounted keeping order amid the chaos, while many looked back at the movement with pride as a heroic struggle. Election Results and Congress-League Divide - The Congress Party won 90% of votes in central legislature non-Muslim constituencies, forming governments in eight provinces. - The Muslim League won all 30 reserved Muslim seats in the central legislature and 442 out of 500 Muslim seats in provincial assemblies, establishing itself as the sole representative of India’s Muslims, unlike in 1937. Jinnah’s Leadership Style - Jinnah, seen as cold and aloof, had a commanding presence despite a lack of traditional charisma. - His determination and belief in his viewpoint convinced many, like Begam Ikramullah, who initially found him intimidating. - Jinnah’s appeals for a vague idea of Pakistan gained strong support among educated Muslims, especially from Aligarh University, where modern Muslim nationalism had roots. Reaching Rural Muslim Populations - Engaging rural Muslims in Muslim-majority provinces was challenging due to their local autonomy. - Jinnah targeted Punjab and Bengal, the key Muslim-majority provinces, aiming to win support to realize Pakistan. - In Bengal, the Muslim League gained power as Fazl-ul-Haq’s coalition government weakened, leading to a League government under Khwaja Nazimuddin in 1943. - In Punjab, Jinnah faced the Unionist Party, which had a cross-communal base of landlords and peasants and was resistant to Muslim solidarity appeals. - The Unionist leader Khizr Hayat Khan’s break from Jinnah in 1944 set the stage for a direct contest with the League. Jinnah’s Political Strategy in Punjab - Jinnah leveraged factional rivalries within the Unionist Party and sought direct appeals to rural voters. - He collaborated with Sufi shrine pirs to gain legitimacy and used student activists to mobilize rural votes under the slogan “Islam in Danger!” - His approach was not mere manipulation; the call for Pakistan resonated with deep-rooted religious loyalty among Muslims, fusing personal commitment to Islam with political solidarity. Rural Muslims’ View of Pakistan - For many rural Muslims, voting for the League became an act of religious identity; not voting for it was seen as turning away from Islam. - Pakistan represented both a modern Muslim nation-state and an idealized Islamic political order, transcending ordinary politics. - The image of Pakistan merged as both a physical territory and a pure Muslim land, despite Jinnah’s intention for a secular state. Cabinet Mission and Its Proposal - Britain, unable to reconcile Congress and the League, sent a Cabinet mission to India in 1946 to propose a plan. - The Cabinet mission suggested a three-tiered federation with three provincial groups: two Muslim-majority in the east and west, and a Hindu-majority in the center and south. - The plan proposed strong provincial group autonomy but central control over defense, foreign affairs, and communications, hoping to satisfy both Congress's desire for unity and the League’s demand for Pakistan. Jinnah’s Goals for Pakistan - Jinnah wanted a “large Pakistan” that included entire provinces like Punjab and Bengal, avoiding a divided Pakistan with Hindu-majority regions. - Inclusion of these provinces would help placate local Muslim leaders concerned about the disorder of partitioned provinces. - Jinnah sought parity for Pakistan with Hindu India, preferring a two-group model (Pakistan and Hindustan) over the Cabinet mission’s three-group suggestion. Nehru and Congress’s Rejection of the Cabinet Mission - Congress, under Nehru, rejected the grouping scheme, as they felt it left the central government too weak. - Congress envisioned a strong central government to industrialize and alleviate poverty, aligning with the Bombay Plan’s proposal for state-led industrial development. - Nehru’s speech on 10 July 1946 dismissed compulsory provincial groupings, undermining the Cabinet mission’s framework. - Congress concluded that a fully independent Pakistan was preferable to a weakened central state governed by provincial and communal interests.