Freedom Struggle Can Show Why Congress-Mukt Bharat is a Bad Idea

The mistakes that were made during the independence movement should not be repeated.

On 31 August 1942, Lord Linlithgow wrote to Winston Churchill, “I am engaged in meeting by far the most serious rebellion since that of 1857, the gravity and extent of which we have so far concealed from the world for reasons of military security.”

It wasn't until the beginning of the following year that the British were able to quell the uprising caused by the Congress's call on 9 August to the British to ‘Quit India’, but not before the colonial rulers had had to use 57 battalions against the rebels and the administration had broken down in large parts of Bihar and what is now eastern UP.

The British blamed the Congress for the violence, but one probable reason for the attacks on railways stations and the telegraph network was the incarceration of virtually the entire Congress leadership which left no one in the field to control and guide the mobs.

Some historians have pointed out, however, that this wasn't the first instance of the Congress's absence from the battlefield which enabled its arch-opponent, the Muslim League, to gain ground.

Moreover, the timing of the Quit India movement, which aimed at extracting a promise from the British to leave India at the end of World War II, has been questioned since it took place when the Allies were involved in a life-and-death struggle with the Axis powers.

As such, it was unrealistic to expect an immediate assurance from the British, especially when a diehard imperialist like Churchill was prime minister.

Also Read: Quit India Movement: The Precursor to India’s Freedom at Midnight

Congress’ Calls For Independence Helped Muslim League Warm up to the British

Had the Congress been the only player in the tussle with the colonial rulers, its tactics might have succeeded. But this wasn't the case since the Muslim League had been able to, by then, successfully exploit the fears that the Congress ministries, which ruled between 1937 and 1939, had aroused among sections of the Muslims about the imposition of a Hindu raj.

As a result, the Congress’s attempt to force the pace, as it were, in the advance towards Independence only enabled the Muslim League to cozy up to the British with its offer to support the war effort.

But the League might not have made any headway if the Congress had not made several mistakes, as the colonial era bureaucrat, Penderel Moon, said in his book, "Divide and Quit”.

One mistake was to decline to “form coalition governments with the League in those provinces in which they had a majority" in 1937.

Then, when the war broke out, the Congress "could have retraced their steps and sought to join with the League in coalitions both in the provinces and at the centre".

At a time when, according to Moon, "moderate men were still in control of the Muslim masses both in Bengal and the Punjab, the forces of disruption could have been checked" by a "working partnership" between the Congress and the League. But fate decreed otherwise.

A relook at the events during the Quit India movement suggests that Partition might have been avoided if the Congress had not been driven by the belief that there were only two forces in India at the time – the British and the Congress – and that there were no third parties such as the Muslim League.

Besides, Jawaharlal Nehru had dismissed communalism as a “side issue”.

Yet, arguably, much of the country's ills stem from the partition. Domestically, the Hindu-Muslim problem hasn't been solved. And, externally, India has acquired an inveterate enemy in Pakistan, whose publicly declared aim is to bleed India with a thousand cuts.

History Warns us Against a ‘Congress-Mukt Bharat’ Agenda

India was fortunate in the 1930s and 1940s to have an array of leaders on either side of the political divide –  Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, and Bose of the Congress, and Jinnah of the Muslim League on the other side along with Sir Sikander Hayat Khan of the Unionist Party and Fazlur Huq of the Krishak Praja Party.

Even then, the country moved inexorably towards partition with the "mistakes" in the 1937-42 period playing a key role.

It is undeniable that ego clashes between Nehru and Jinnah came in the way of finding a meeting ground with the former delivering the death blow to the possibility of an agreement by virtually rejecting the British Cabinet Mission's plan for avoiding partition even after the Muslim League had accepted it.

What history tells us, therefore, is the need for treading with caution in dealing with India's complexity. Any attempt to project a party as the only hope for the country, as the Congress did 75 years ago, is fraught with fateful consequences.

The Congress did succeed in getting rid of the British though at the cost of the country's unity. But any attempt to evict the Congress from the country via a Congress-mukt Bharat agenda can make the party's opponents fall prey to the malady of hubris.

(Amulya Ganguli is a political analyst. The views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)

(This article has been published in an arrangement with IANS)

Also Read: 75 Yrs of Quit India: Parliament Prepares to Hold Special Session

(We all love to express ourselves, but how often do we do it in our mother tongue? Here's your chance! This Independence Day, khul ke bol with BOL – Love your Bhasha. Sing, write, perform, spew poetry – whatever you like – in your mother tongue. Send us your BOL at [e-mail] or WhatsApp it to 9910181818.)