The Freedom Movement : nehru gandhi british communist nexus
- From: "solutionfutures" <solutionfutures@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 27 Aug 2005 00:56:09 -0700
The Freedom Movement
Just as ancient and medieval history have been distorted under Congress
patronage, history of the Freedom Movement has also been dressed up to
favor the Congress and the Communists. This distortion has the
following three parts: (1) Building up the role of Gandhi and Nehru
while suppressing the contribution of others, notably Subhas Bose. (2)
Whitewashing Gandhi's terrible blunder of supporting the Khilafat
Movement and the atrocities of the Mopla Rebellion that followed. (3)
Whitewashing the treachery of the Communists. We can next take a brief
look at each one of them.
It is commonly believed that it was the Congress Party through its
various movements like the Quit India Movement of 1942 that brought
freedom to India. This fails to explain the fact that the British
granted independence only in 1947 while the Quit India Movement had
collapsed by the end of 1942. The question that naturally arises is-
why did the British leave in such great hurry in August 1947? The
answer was provided by Prime Minister Clement Attlee, the man who made
the decision to grant independence to India.
When B.P. Chakravarti was acting as Governor of West Bengal, Lord
Attlee visited India and stayed as his guest for three days at the Raj
Bhavan. Chakravarti asked Attlee about the real grounds for granting
independence to India. Specifically, his question was, when the Quit
India movement lay in ruins years before 1947, where was the need for
the British to leave in such a hurry. Attlee's response is most
illuminating and important for history. Here is what Attlee told him:
In reply Attlee cited several reasons, the most important were the
activities of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose which weakened the very
foundation of the attachment of the Indian land and naval forces to the
British Government. Towards the end, I asked Lord Attlee about the
extent to which the British decision to quit India was influenced by
Gandhi's activities. On hearing this question Attlee's lips widened
in a smile of disdain and he uttered, slowly, putting emphasis on each
single letter - "mi-ni-mal." (Emphasis added.)
The crucial point to note is that thanks to Subhas Bose's activities,
the Indian Armed Forces began to see themselves as defenders of India
rather than of the British Empire. This, more than anything else, was
what led to India's freedom. This is also the reason why the British
Empire disappeared from the face of the earth within an astonishingly
short space of twenty years. Indian soldiers, who were the main prop of
the Empire, were no longer willing to fight for the British. What
influenced the British decision was mutiny of the Indian Navy following
the INA trials in 1946. While the British wanted to try Subhas Bose's
INA as traitors, Indian soldiers saw them as nationalists and patriots.
This scared the British. They decided to get out in a hurry.
(Attlee repeated his argument on at least two other occasions,
including once in the House of Commons. During a debate in the House of
Commons, he told Churchill that he would agree to the latter's
suggestion of holding on to India if he could guarantee the loyalty of
the Indian armed forces. Churchill had no reply. The Labour Prime
Minister was as much an imperialist as Churchill, but more pragmatic,
prepared to see the writing on the wall.)
This will come as a shock to most Indians brought up to believe that
the Congress movement driven by the 'spiritual force' of Mahatma
Gandhi forced the British to leave India. But both evidence and the
logic of history are against this beautiful but childish fantasy. It
was the fear of mutiny by the Indian armed forces - and not any
'spiritual force' - that forced the issue of freedom. The British
saw that the sooner they left the better for themselves, for, at the
end of the war, India had some three million men under arms. One would
have to be extraordinarily dense - which the British were not - to
fail to see the writing on the wall.
So, as the great historian R.C. Majumdar wrote, Subhas Bose with his
INA campaigns probably contributed more to Indian independence than
Gandhi, Nehru and their movements. The result of Subhas Bose's
activities was the rise of the nationalist spirit in the Indian Armed
Forces. This is the reason why Nehru, after he became Prime Minister,
did everything possible to turn Bose into a non-person. He wanted no
rivals.
This brings us to Mahatma Gandhi and his ill-fated Nonviolent
Non-Cooperation Movement. Most Indians have been made to believe that
it was the first of Gandhi's movements for India's freedom. This is
completely false. The Non-Cooperation Movement was for the restoration
of the Sultan of Turkey as the Caliph. This was known as the Khilafat
Movement, launched by Indian Muslims, led by Maulanas Mohamad Ali and
Shaukat Ali. In fact, Gandhi postponed Tilak's Swaraj Resolution by
nearly ten years in order to join the Khilafat. (Lokamanya Tilak had
died in 1920 and Gandhi and the Ali Brothers launched the Khilafat in
1921. Gandhi even diverted a substantial part of the Tilak Swaraj Fund
to the Khilafat.) Indian history books omit the fact that the sole
purpose of the Non-Cooperation Movement was the restoration of the
Sultan of Turkey.
Gandhi promised the Ali Brothers that the British would be driven out
'within the year'. The failure of the Khilafat agitation, whose
goal was to replace the British Raj with what Annie Beasant called
'Khilafat Raj', led to a Jihad known as the Mopla Rebellion in
which thousands of innocent people were slaughtered. (Moplas are a
Muslim sect of the Malabar district in Kerala.) History books,
controlled by the Congress-secularist establishment rarely mention the
Mopla Rebellion, which was the main result of the Gandhi-Congress
support for the Khilafat Movement. What is so bad about it that they
want to hide it? Sir Sankaran Nair, an eyewitness to the Mopla horrors
had this to say in his book Gandhi and Anarchy:
"For sheer brutality on women, I do not remember anything in history to
match the Malabar [Mopla] rebellion. ... The atrocities committed more
particularly on women are so horrible and unmentionable that I do not
propose to refer to them in this book." (See Gandhi, Khilafat and the
National Movement by N.S. Rajaram for several eyewitness accounts.)
This brutality was to be equaled if not surpassed in the holocaust of
the Partition - now being re-enacted in Kashmir. What was Gandhi's
reaction to the Mopla outrages? He called the Moplas "God fearing" and
said they "are fighting for what they consider as religion, and in a
manner they consider as religious." This from the Apostle of
Nonviolence!
The message of the Khilafat was not lost on Muslim leaders like
Mohammed Ali Jinnah. (He had opposed the Congress support for the
Khilafat.) He correctly recognized that the Congress leaders would
always back down in the face of threat of violence. They would rather
appease than fight on principles. This happened repeatedly - in 1948
and 1972 in dealing with Pakistan, and also in the 1950s in dealing
with China and Tibet. Nehru abandoned Kashmir to Pakistan (through the
UN) and abandoned also Tibet to China, sacrificing India's national
interests. As Congress ruled India for forty years following
independence, this practice of appeasement gave India the label of a
'soft state'.
The Congress's appeasement policy reached its absurd limit, when the
Nehru Government succumbed to Gandhi's blackmail and gave Pakistan 55
crore rupees at a time when Indian troops were fighting the Pakistanis
in Kashmir. I already noted that Gandhi had diverted a substantial sum
from the Tilak Swaraj Fund to the Khilafat, in addition to postponing
Tilak's Swaraj Resolution in favor of the Khilafat Movement.
Another source of distortion of this period of history is rooted in the
treacherous role played by the Communists. This is a matter of record,
though Communist intellectuals, by monopolizing institutions like the
ICHR, are trying to whitewash their role. To understand their
treachery, we should recognize that Communist leaders in other
colonized countries were first and foremost nationalists who fought for
freedom. Next, they came from the masses. This is true of leaders like
Mao of China, Ho Chi Min of Vietnam, Fidel Castro of Cuba and several
others. Indian Communist leaders on the other hand come mostly from the
English educated elite. They have always looked to the West for
everything. So when India was fighting for her freedom, the Communists
were agents of foreign governments like Germany, Russia, Britain and
finally even Pakistan!
When the Second World War began, because of the Stalin-Hitler Pact, the
Communists found themselves on the same side as Nazi Germany. They were
ordered by Stalin to support Hitler's war as a war against
imperialist countries like Britain and France. When Germany attacked
Russia in June 1941, the Indian Communists made a 180-degree turn and
began supporting the British! This meant working against national
leaders like Gandhi and Subhas Bose, who were seen as enemies of the
British. The great historian R.C. Majumdar wrote:
"During the great national upsurge of 1942, the Communists acted as
stooges and spies of the British Government... Mr. Joshi (of the
Communist Party) was placing at the disposal of India the services of
his Party Members... Joshi had, as General Secretary of the Party,
written a letter in which he offered 'unconditional help' to the
then Government of India and the Army GHQ to fight the 1942 underground
workers and the Azad Hind Fauz (INA) of Subhas Chandra Bose...
Joshi's letter revealed that the CPI was receiving financial aid from
the British Government, had a secret pact with the Muslim League..."
As part of their pact with the Muslim League, the Communists openly
supported the demand for Pakistan, "but went much further by saying
that every linguistic group in India had a distinct nationality and was
entitled ... to secede." After independence, the Communists struck a
deal with the Nizam's Government in Hyderabad and joined hands with
the Razakars to fight Hyderabad's accession to India with
Pakistan's help. When Sardar Patel sent troops into Hyderabad, Kasim
Rizvi ran away to Pakistan, handing over the bulk of his guns and other
arms to the Communists. The Communists kept up an armed insurrection in
the Telengana region for a few years until ordered to stop by the
Soviet dictator Stalin.
The Communists supported China's attack on India and 1962 and also
the Chinese nuclear tests, while vehemently opposing India's
successful tests at Pokharan. It is this formidable record of treachery
that the Communist intellectuals are trying to erase by controlling
institutions like the ICHR, NIEPA and NCERT. They have now joined hands
with the Sonia Congress in a desperate struggle for survival.
.
- Prev by Date: Kargil and its lessons
- Next by Date: The Freedom Movement : nehru gandhi british communist nexus
- Previous by thread: Kargil and its lessons
- Next by thread: The Freedom Movement : nehru gandhi british communist nexus
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
