Resumption of Civil Disobedience - August Offer and Cripp's Mission; Gandhi (1937-40)

[ bottom right] Roosevelt.

The Congress reiterated its objective in even clearer and  stronger terms in the Ramgarh session in March 1940. The resolution adopted by it declared that "nothing short of complete independence can be accepted by the people of India"and they " alone can properly shape their own constitution."The resolution also held out threat of restoring civil disobedience ," 
On May 20, 1940, Pandit Nehru made an astounding statement in which he said, 'Launching a civil disobedience campaign at a time when Britain is engaged in life and death struggle would be an act derogatory to India's honour .' Similarly, the Mahatma said, ' we do not seek our Independence out of Britain's ruin. That is not the way of non-violence.'
The Working Committee which met at Wardha on 17-20 June 1940, was definitely opposed to the view of Gandhi , a resolution ran, 'at this critical phase in the history of man, that India should maintain armed forces ..against external aggression or internal disorder.'.
Gandhi once again regained his supremacy in the Congress . He did not make independence of India main issue or a side issue, declared Gandhi was not freedom of India but freedom of speech. He started Individual Satyagraha to achieve that. Gandhi began the campaign on 17 Oct 1940. by selecting one individual at a timeto go out in the street shouting anti war slogans and get dsrrested.    
(Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, DL, FRS, RA (30 November 1874 – 24 January 1965) was a British politicianwho was the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1940 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1955. Widely regarded as one of the greatest wartime leaders of the 20th century, Churchill was also an officer in the British Army, a historian, a writer (as Winston S. Churchill), and an artist. He won the Nobel Prize in Literature, and was the first person to be made an honorary citizen of the United States.)

Background A change of government took place in Britain in May 1940 and Winston Churchill became the prime minister (1940–45). The fall of France temporarily softened the attitude of congress in India. Britain was in immediate danger of Nazi occupation. As the war was taking a menacing turn from the allied point of view congress offered to cooperate in the war if transfer of authority in India is done to an interim government. The governments response was a statement of the viceroy known as the august offer

On 8 August 1940, early in the Battle of Britain, the Viceroy of India, Lord Linlithgow, made the so-called August Offer, a fresh proposal promising the expansion of the Executive Council to include more Indians, the establishment of an advisory war council, giving full weight to minority opinion, and the recognition of Indians' right to frame their own constitution (after the end of the war). In return, it was hoped that all parties and communities in India would cooperate in Britain's war effort.

The declaration marked an important advance over the existing state of things, as it recognised at least the natural and inherent right of the people of the country to determine the form of their future constitution, and explicitly promised dominion status. However, The Congress Working Committee meeting at Wardha on August 21, 1940 rejected this offer, and asserted its demand for complete freedom from the imperial power. Gandhi viewed it as having widened the gulf between Nationalist India and the British ruler. It was also rejected by Muslim League. The Muslim League asserted that it would not be satisfied by anything short of partition of India.

The following proposals were put in:

1. After the war a representative Indian body would be set up to frame a constitution for India.
2. Viceroy's Executive Council would be expanded without delay.
3. The minorities were assured that the government would not transfer power "to any system of government whose authority is directly denied by large and powerful elements in Indian national life."

Individual Satyagraha 1940-41 The Congress was in a confused state again after the August Offer. The radicals and leftists wanted to launch a mass Civil Disobedience Movement, but here Gandhi insisted on Individual Satyagraha. The Individual Satyagraha was not to seek independence but to affirm the right of speech. The other reason of this Satyagraha was that a mass movement may turn violent and he would not like to see the Great Britain embarrassed by such a situation. This view was conveyed to Lord Linlithgow by Gandhi when he met him on September 27, 1940. The non-violence was set as the centerpiece of Individual Satyagraha. This was done by carefully selecting the Satyagrahis. The first Satyagrahi selected was Acharya Vinoba Bhave, who was sent to Jail when he spoke against the war. Second Satyagrahi was Jawahar Lal Nehru. Third was Brahma Datt, one of the inmates of the Gandhi's Ashram. They all were sent to jails for violating the Defense of India Act. This was followed by a lot of other people. But since it was not a mass movement, it attracted little enthusiasm and in December 1940, Gandhi suspended the movement. The campaign started again in January 1941, this time, thousands of people joined and around 20 thousand people were arrested.

Significant modifications were made in the August Offer in 1942 in the form of Cripps Proposals.

Subhas Chandra Bose (1937-1940)

[  Bose, the president-elect of the Indian National Congress, arrives in Calcutta on 24 January 1938 after a two-month vacation in Europe where he had spent one and a half months with Emilie Schenkl at the spa resort of Bad Gastein, and had secretly married her on 26 December 1937.]
[ Congress president Bose with Mohandas K. Gandhi at the Congress annual general meeting 1938]

Bose at the Lahore City Railway Station on 24 November 1938


.Bose arriving at the 1939 annual session of the Congress, where he was re-elected, but later had to resign after disagreements with Gandhi and the Congress High Command.

Bose, Indian National Congress president-elect, center, in Bad Gastein, Austria, December 1937, with (left to right) A. C. N. Nambiar (who was later to be Bose's second-in-command in Berlin, 1941–1945), Heidi Fulop-Miller, Emilie Schenkl, and Amiya Bose.
He stood for unqualified Swaraj (self-governance), including the use of force against the British. This meant a confrontation with Mohandas Gandhi, who in fact opposed Bose's presidency, splitting the Indian National Congress party. Bose attempted to maintain unity, but Gandhi advised Bose to form his own cabinet. The rift also divided Bose and Nehru. Bose appeared at the 1939 Congress meeting on a stretcher. He was elected president again over Gandhi's preferred candidate Pattabhi Sitaramayya. U. Muthuramalingam Thevar strongly supported Bose in the intra-Congress dispute. Thevar mobilised all south India votes for Bose. However, due to the maneuverings of the Gandhi-led clique in the Congress Working Committee, Bose found himself forced to resign from the Congress presidency. On 22 June 1939 Bose organised the All India Forward Bloc a faction within the Indian National Congress, aimed at consolidating the political left, but its main strength was in his home state, Bengal. U Muthuramalingam Thevar, who was a staunch supporter of Bose from the beginning, joined the Forward Bloc. When Bose visited Madurai on 6 September, Thevar organised a massive rally as his reception When Subash Chandra Bose was heading to Madurai, on an invitation of Muthuramalinga Thevar to amass support for the Forward Bloc, he passed through Madras and spent three days at Gandhi Peak. His correspondence reveals that despite his clear dislike for British subjugation, he was deeply impressed by their methodical and systematic approach and their steadfastly disciplinarian outlook towards life. In England, he exchanged ideas on the future of India with British Labour Party leaders and political thinkers like Lord Halifax, George Lansbury, Clement Attlee, Arthur Greenwood, Harold Laski, J.B.S. Haldane, Ivor Jennings, G.D.H. Cole, Gilbert Murray and Sir Stafford Cripps. He came to believe that an independent India needed socialist authoritarianism, on the lines of Turkey's Kemal Atatürk, for at least two decades. Bose was refused permission by the British authorities to meet Atatürk at Ankara for political reasons. During his sojourn in England, only the Labour Party and Liberal politicians agreed to meet with Bose when he tried to schedule appointments. Conservative Party officials refused to meet Bose or show him courtesy because he was a politician coming from a colony. In the 1930s leading figures in the Conservative Party had opposed even Dominion status for India. It was during the Labour Party government of 1945–1951, with Attlee as the Prime Minister, that India gained independence. On the outbreak of war, Bose advocated a campaign of mass civil disobedience to protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow's decision to declare war on India's behalf without consulting the Congress leadership. Having failed to persuade Gandhi of the necessity of this, Bose organised mass protests in Calcutta calling for the 'Holwell Monument' commemorating the Black Hole of Calcutta, which then stood at the corner of Dalhousie Square, to be removed. He was thrown in jail by the British, but was released following a seven-day hunger strike. Bose's house in Calcutta was kept under surveillance by the CID.

- The story about the Black Hole of Calcutta refuses to die

Rudrangshu Mukherjee

Holwell monument: standing tall In India, anniversaries, even of non-events, do not often go unnoticed. Thus it is a bit of a surprise that nobody noticed that on June 20, a myth began the journey to its 150th jubilee. If one were to believe John Zephaniah Holwell, a Dubliner and a senior officer of the English East India Company, on June 20, 1756, Siraj ud Daulah, the then Nawab of Bengal, upon capturing Calcutta, locked up about 150 of the city's European residents in the dungeons of the Fort. Without food, water and air, by morning, 60 of the prisoners were dead. Holwell was one of the survivors and he memorialized the event, which came to be notorious in Britain as the Black Hole of Calcutta. It was the British raj's first chamber of horrors: proof of Indian infamy, and pretext and justification of conquest and violence. For many years, there stood close to Lal Dighi (later to become Dalhousie Square and then BBD Bagh, through a burst of post-colonial myth-making) an obelisk to commemorate the victims of the Black Hole. It was erected by Holwell himself at his own expense and thus known as Holwell Monument. Holwell also wrote a vivid and dramatic account of the sufferings of the prisoners in the small room. He wrote that out of 146 only 23 survived. Holwell's monument and his account of the Black Hole had a very limited impact on his contemporaries. Newspapers in Britain in 1758 carried extracts from his recollections of captivity, but then the reports died down. No new edition of his account appeared. Most contemporaries of Holwell, the British historian, Linda Colley notes, did not accept Holwell's vilification of Siraj ud Daulah. The history of the Black Hole monument in the early 19th century is significant. It was allowed to fall into ruin, and in 1821, under the orders of the Marquis of Hastings, Lord Moira, the then governor-general, it was taken down. Before it was brought down, Cotton records in Calcutta Old and New, the obelisk, the monument to British suffering, had become 'the lounging place for lower class loafers of all sorts who gossip squatting around and against it.' Obviously, neither British officialdom nor the Britons who lived in Calcutta at that time had time for the monument and the event it commemorated. If those were the conditions of the monument, what of the site where the 'event' actually took place' Lord Valentia, a visitor to Calcutta in1803, wrote, 'The Black Hole is now part of a godown or warehouse; it was filled with goods and I could not see it.' Commerce had taken precedence over comme- moration. The Black Hole made a dramatic reappearance when Thomas Babington Macaulay in 1840 described it as 'that great crime memorable for its singular atrocity'. The eminent Victorians seized upon it to make it into a foundation myth of the British Empire in India. The other paladin of Empire, Lord Curzon, at the beginning of the 20th century, restored the crumbling Holwell Monument. But Curzon's act of restoration was mediated by an important text: H.E. Busteed's Echoes of Old Calcutta (first published in 1888). Curzon wrote to Busteed that he had read the book on his way out to India and through the text he had pictured again 'the moral agony of the Black Hole'. Busteed bemoaned the neglect Holwell's Monument had had to suffer. He wrote, 'To the reproach of Calcutta, their neglected dust has for so long been silently crying out (dum tacet, clamat) against the thoughtless indifference which have consigned it to oblivion and disrespect.' (sic) It was an appeal to the conscience of the proconsuls of Empire, and the most proud of them heard it. After Curzon's restoration, in the 1908 edition of his book, Busteed was to write that the Black Hole site has ' 'a thousand claims to reverence'... Its memorial and the restored 'Holwell Monument' are a very prized possession to the Calcutta of today, a sacred trust to be guarded and handed down to the Calcutta of the future.' A dying myth had thus been raised, not Phoenix-like from the ashes, but from dust. There is occasion to pause a moment with Curzon and his response to the Black Hole. Why did he, in his letter to Busteed, speak of the 'moral agony' of the Black Hole' If agony there was for the victims, it must have been physical. Was Curzon, in a slip that post-modernists so like to seize upon, signaling something else' Was he perhaps aware of the fabrication and exaggeration that Holwell had perpetrated' The moral agony lay, one can suggest in a flight of fancy, in accepting for the sake of Empirebuilding what Curzon guessed was not quite true. The British Empire needed myths, especially some that justified the original act of violence embodied in the act of conquest. Lord Curzon was only too aware of a 'duty of reverence to a past which was the unconscious seed-time of our present Imperial harvest.' Myths die hard. The one about the Black Hole has endured. The incident earned for itself a place in that classic send-off on British history, Sellar and Yeatman's 1066 And All That, and it retains a place in all British books about the British Empire. This despite the fact that most historians, including British ones, believe that Holwell's account was over-blown and exaggerated. One historian estimated that it was impossible to fit 146 persons into a room that, according to Holwell, was only 18 feet square, even if the bodies were horizontally stacked. There were doubts raised as early as 1772 about the Nawab's intentions. A witness told a parliamentary committee that year that 'he did not believe the Nawab had any intention of a massacre when he confined the English in the Black Hole'. By the second half of the 20th century, doubts had moved beyond Siraj's intentions. Many Indian historians had come round to the view that nothing like the Black Hole had happened at all. Myths have an unfortunate habit of becoming a part of nation-building. This might be necessary but is always dangerous. The Indian nation, in the process of establishing itself, has dislodged many imperial myths but has also created some new ones. Curzon, as we noted, was very conscious of the 'Imperial harvest'. Indians should be careful about nurturing the National harvest based on myths.

Jawaharlal Nehru (1930-1937)

Nehru and most of the Congress leaders were initially ambivalent about Gandhi's plan to begin civil disobedience with a satyagraha aimed at the British salt tax. After the protest gathered steam, they realised the power of salt as a symbol. Nehru remarked about the unprecedented popular response, "it seemed as though a spring had been suddenly released." Nehru was arrested on 14 April 1930 while entraining from Allahabad for Raipur. He had earlier, after addressing a huge meeting and leading a vast procession, ceremoniously manufactured some contraband salt. He was charged with breach of the salt law, tried summarily behind prison walls and sentenced to six months of imprisonment. Nehru nominated Gandhi to succeed him as Congress President during his absence in jail, but Gandhi declined, and Nehru then nominated his father as his successor. With Nehru's arrest the civil disobedience acquired a new tempo, and arrests, firing on crowds and lathi charges grew to be ordinary occurrences.

The Salt Satyagraha succeeded in drawing the attention of the world. Indian, British, and world opinion increasingly began to recognise the legitimacy of the claims by the Congress party for independence. Nehru considered the salt satyagraha the high-water mark of his association with Gandhi, and felt that its lasting importance was in changing the attitudes of Indians:

"Of course these movements exercised tremendous pressure on the British Government and shook the government machinery. But the real importance, to my mind, lay in the effect they had on our own people, and especially the village masses. ... Non-cooperation dragged them out of the mire and gave them self-respect and self-reliance. ... They acted courageously and did not submit so easily to unjust oppression; their outlook widened and they began to think a little in terms of India as a whole. ... It was a remarkable transformation and the Congress, under Gandhi's leadership, must have the credit for it.

Architect of IndiaGandhi and Nehru in 1942

Nehru elaborated the policies of the Congress and a future Indian nation under his leadership in 1929. He declared that the aims of the congress were freedom of religion, right to form associations, freedom of expression of thought, equality before law for every individual without distinction of caste, colour, creed or religion, protection to regional languages and cultures, safeguarding the interests of the peasants and labour, abolition of untouchability, introduction of adult franchise, imposition of prohibition, nationalisation of industries, socialism, and establishment of a secular India. All these aims formed the core of the "Fundamental Rights and Economic Policy" resolution drafted by Nehru in 1929–31 and were ratified by the All India Congress Committee under Gandhi's leadership. However, some Congress leaders objected to the resolution and decided to oppose Nehru.

The espousal of socialism as the Congress goal was most difficult to achieve. Nehru was opposed in this by the right-wing CongressmenSardar Patel, Dr. Rajendra Prasad and Chakravarthi Rajagopalachari. Nehru had the support of the left-wing Congressmen Maulana Azadand Subhas Chandra Bose. The trio combined to oust Dr. Prasad as Congress President in 1936. Nehru was elected in his place and held the presidency for two years (1936–37).

Kamala died from tuberculosis in Lausanne, Switzerland on 28 February 1936, with her daughter and her mother-in-law by her side. Kamala was cremated at the Lausanne Crematorium. A number of institutions in India, such as  Kamala Nehru College, University of Delhi, Kamala Nehru Park, Kamla Nehru Institute of Technology(Sultanpur), Kamala Nehru Polytechnic (Hyderabad) are named after her.

M.K.Gandhi during 1930-1937 (contd-1)

Lord Irwin was succeeded  by Lord Willingdon on April 17, 1931.as viceroy.
 The new Government undertook massive repressive measures and most of the prisoners were placed in 'C' category, only a few leaders were placed in B category. and was placed in A.
In the Summer of 1934 , three unsuccessful attempts were made on his life.
When the Congress Party choose to contest elections and accept power under the federation scheme, Gandhi decided to resign from party membership. He did not disagree to withdraw the party's move, but felt that if he resigned, his popularity with Indians would cease to stifle the party's membership , that actually varied from communists, socialists, trade unionists, students religious conservatives , to those with the pro-Business convictions. Gandhi also did not want to prove a target for Raj propaganda by leading a party that had temporarily accepted political accomodation with the Raj
Gandhi returned to the head in 1936, with the Nehru Presidency and the Lucknau session of the Congress.  
Dehsabandhu C.R.Das is reported to have frequently made the following observation about the virtues and failings of Gandhi's leadership ; " The Mahatma opens a campaign in a brilliant fashion; he works it up with unerring skill, he moves from success to success till he reaches the Zenith of his campaign - but after that he loses its nerve and begins to falter." The truth of this remark is well illustrated by the history of Gandhi's campaigns both of 1921 and 1930-33.
Poona Agreement-  The Poona Pact refers to an agreement between Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar and Mahatma Gandhi signed on 24 September 1932 at Yerwada Central Jail in Pune (now in Maharashtra), India. Jawaharlal Nehru commented Poona act as in 1922, ' I felt annoyed with him (Gandhi) for choosing a side issue for his final sacrifice . What would be the result of the freedom movement ?'

M.K.Gandhi during 1930-1938

March 12 , the historical Dandy March began.

05 May, 1930 5th March, 1931 29th March, 1931 5th Dec 1931

At 12.45 a.m. arrested at Karadi near Dandi for violating Salt Law, without trail was imprisoned and released on 26 January, 1931 unconditionally. 5th March 1931, Gandhi Irwin Pact was announced Left for London to attend Round Table conference Decided to restart Civil Dis-obedience  1932 January 4 Arrested and imprisoned without trial. September 20 Commences ‘fast unto death’ in jail to secure abolition of separate electorates for Harijans in Communal Award. 26 Breaks fast on Government of India’s acceptance of his demand regarding Harijans. 1933 February 11 Founds the weekly paper Harijan, published in English and Hindi. May 8 Commences at noon 21 days’ fast for self-purification; released unconditionally at 9 p.m. 9 Announces suspension of Civil Disobedience movement for six weeks and calls on the Government to withdraw its Ordinances. 29 Breaks fast. July 26 Disbands Satyagraha Ashram. 30 Informs Government of Bombay of his decision to march from Ahmedabad to Ras with 33 followers to revive Civil Disobedience movement. 31 Arrested and imprisoned without trial. August 4 Released and rearrested for breaking a restraint order. 16 Goes on fast on being denied facilities to carry on anti-untouchability propaganda. 23 Released and reasserted for breaking a restraint order. November 7 Commences Harijan-uplift tour. 1934 September 17 Announces decision to retire from politics from October I to engage himself in development of village industries, Harijan service and education through basic crafts. October 26 Inaugurates All-India Village Industries Association. 1936 April 30 Settles down at Sevagram, a village near Wardha in the Central Provinces, Making it his headquarters. 1937 October 22 Presides over Educational Conference at Wardha and outlines his scheme of education through basic crafts.

THE GREATEST SON OF INDIA NETAJI SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSE Part-1

Subhas Chandra back again to Europe

After finishing Shradh ceremony of his father, Subhas Chandra left India in January and reached Naples on January 20, 1935.
 On his way north Bose stopped in Rome and had another audience with Mussolini. He presented the Duce with a co;py of his recently released book The Indian Struggle, 1920-1934Sir Samuel Hoare announced in the House of Commons that the book had been proscribed by the Govt. of India on the ground that it tended generally to encourage methods of terrorism and of direct action. The book could not be imported in India and was only circulated in West. Most of the reviews were positive and the foreign editor of the Daily Herald of London, Mr.M.N.Ewar wrote, "Bose of course , is  is stamped as an extremist, a wild man, a menace to Society...."
Years later a foundation stone was laid , before the hall, Mahajati Sadan was built.
For Rome he went onto Geneva for memorial service for Vithalbhai Patel, Switzerland on March 22, 1935.Later in 1935, Rolland wrote an appreciation of Bose's Indian Struggle.
Bose had a surgical operation of his GallBlooder , operated by Dr. Demel.
He did take time out from his own recovery to do this small part to help Kamala Nehru, wife of Jawaharlal Nehru. She came to Europe in June to seek the best European medical assistance., but she had advanced pulmonary tuberculosis and hopes were not high.Bose met her in Vienna and later after Jawaharlal had been released from prison to be with his stricken wife. Bose met them them at Badenweiler in the Black forest of Germany.
Nehru who has just finishing his superb autobiography , Toward Freedom. Bose blamed Nehru for not making more of a protest at the curtailing of Civil Disobedience , from the time of the Gandhi-Irwin Pact to the present
Bose was most eager to see President De Valeraand to get asense of the political situation in Ireland. . Perhaps because th the Irish had been struggling for so many decades .President De Valera interrupted his busy schedule to hold not one but three meetings with Bose.
When the Lloyd Triestino docked in Bombayon April 8, 1936, Subhas Bose was immediately arrested.and faced another indefinite term of imprisonment
The whole country became flared up at the arrest of Subhas  and 10th May  was declared as Nikhil Bharat Subhas Dibas.
Subhas Chandra became again seriously ill for long term imprisonment. At last Subhas was released unconditionally by the Govt. on 17th March 1937 and he addressed a public meeting at Shraddhananda Park on 6th April 1937.
After being released Subhas went to Dalhousie of Punjab for recovery of his health. and came back to Calcutta in Oct 1937. He again went to Europe for medical Assistance by plane in Nov 1937 and got his treatment in Badgastein of Austria.
He went to England in Jan 1938.

In the context of 'preface of The Indian Struggle'.

Bose was searching for a literary figure to write a preface to his book, The Indian Struggle,  for the publisher thought this would help the sales. He wrote to Rabindranath Tagore seeking assistance in contacting Bernard Shaw . He chided Tagore for the perfunctory letter Tagore had written to Romain Rolland on his behalf earlier.

Tagore declined to write Shaw and he did not comment on the rough and ready , blunt manner in which Bose wrote to him. Nepal Majumdar , a historian , noted on Bose-Tagore relationship by saying that usually people did not write to Tagore in such a fashion. Tagore thought that Gandhi had and would have an enduring impact on India.To ignore Gandhi's power Tagore told Bose , was to blind one's self to the realities of modern India.
Bose completed the manuscript and before long , by the later months of 1934, was reading the proof of his book.
In august he had gone to Karlsbad, a spa, to drink the hot , salty mineral waters to see whether they would cure his abdominal pains.

The Indian Struggle (contd-1)

The Indian Struggle is Bose's effort to give his version of the recent political history of India. It is concerned especially with the changing strategies of the Congress and the Raj. It contains sharply  etched views of the top leadership of the Nationalist movement.
The book contained praise as well as sharp criticism of Gandhi. Bose saw Gandhi as the head of an older reformist group of nationalists , It was as if he were indirectly borrowing Marxist categories, identifying his political allies and himself with the masses of Indians  and seeing  Gandhi , who he admitted was accepted by the masses as their leader, as the head of the oppressive forces. He viewed Gandhi and the Gandhian high command and the Government of India as restraints on the radical and militant nationalist forces with which he identified. These radical forces had a rebel mentality , rejecting the authority of the Government but also questioning the authority  and the wisdom of the dominant leadership of the nationalist movement.
One feature of the Congress to which Bose moat objected was the lack of criticism of Gandhi, through his various twists and turns. Bose wrote

The leaders of this category were Maulana Azad, C.R.Rajagopalachari, and Sardar Patel etc.  Bose tried to come to terms with Gandhi's hold on the masses , which none had been tried to challenge or break. Bose wrote; 

Being personally religious, Bose took the side of reason, science and modern values . Bose condemned the numerous blunders of the Mahatma , specially Gandhi's lack of planning for the Second Round Table Conference. The root of Gandhi's error was his confusion between Gandhi's roles as political leader and world preacher. Bose thought that Gandhi's success was due to ' effective fusion of religion and politics.'      

But Bose created some confusion at the end of his book by saying on ideological question as ' synthesis of communism and fascism' which he explained in an interview with R. Palme Dutt.  

.  

The Indian Struggle

The Indian Struggle, 1920–1942

Aut hor	Subhas Chandra Bose
Published	Part I (1920–1934) Wishart & Co., London 1935; Part II (1935–1942) Italy 1942

The Indian Struggle, 1920–1942 is a two-part book by the Indian nationalist leader Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose that covers the 1920–1942 history of the Indian independence movement to end British imperial rule over India. Banned in India by the British colonial government, The Indian Struggle was published in the country only in 1948 after India became independent. The book analyses a period of the Indian freedom struggle from the Non-Cooperation and Khilafat Movements of the early 1920s to the Quit India and Azad Hind movements of the early 1940s.

Two parts

The first part of The Indian Struggle covering the years 1920–1934 was published in London in 1935 by Lawrence and Wishart. Bose had been in exile in Europe following his arrest and detention by the colonial government for his association with the revolutionary group, the Bengal Volunteers and his suspected role in several acts of violence. In Vienna, where he wrote the book, Bose had to largely rely on memory as he did not have access to documentary material. When Bose arrived in Karachi in December 1934 in defiance of the colonial government's ban on his entry into India, he was arrested and the original manuscript of the book seized. Published in London the following year, the book was well received by the British press and critics. The British were quick to ban it in India and Samuel Hoare, the Secretary of State for India, justified this action to the House of Commons on the grounds that it encouraged terrorism and direct action among the masses.

The second part dealing with 1935–1942 was written by Bose during the Second World War. A planned German edition of the book never came to fruition during Bose's stay in Europe during 1941–'43 while an Italian edition came out in 1942. He was assisted in writing the book by Emilie Schenkl whom he went on to marry and who bore him a daughter.

Themes

The Indian Struggle contains Bose's evaluation of Gandhi's role and contribution to the freedom struggle, his own vision for an independent India and his approach to politics. Bose was critical of Gandhi in the book accusing the Mahatma of being too soft and almost naive in his dealings with the colonial regime and who with his status quoism had become "the best policeman the Britisher had in India". Bose also predicted a left-wing revolt in the Indian National Congress that would give rise to a new political party with a "clear ideology, program and plan of action" that would among other things "stand for the interests of the masses", advocate the complete liberation of the Indian people, advocate a federal India with a strong central government and support land reforms, state planning and a system of panchayats.

On his way back to Vienna in 1935, Bose met with Benito Mussolini in Rome where he gave the dictator a copy of his book. Bose was opposed to Nehru's anti-Fascism and argued instead for a synthesis of communism and fascism in India. While a proponent of military discipline in political life and an advocate of a government by a strong party, Bose was also opposed to totalitarianism rejecting the model of the Nazi party and calling for democracy both within and among political parties. Bose's ideological leaning, which he outlines in the book, has been described as 'fascistic' but it was shaped by his increasing frustration with the failure to realise Indian independence and not by a sense of megalomania.