Introduction

• The modern Indian political discourse began with Rammohun Roy and had a social connotation which transformed into a political one after the establishment of the Indian National Congress in 1885.
• The early philosophy of Indian nationalism focused more on social issues than political ones due to deep social cleavages and the unevenness of modern concepts like nation.
• Rammohun Roy talked about India’s subordination and the need for freedom from British rule after 150 years.
• Surendranath Bannerjee followed Rammohun’s ideas, asserting that India was not yet a nation, but a nation in the making.
• In the last quarter of the 19th century, the philosophy of cultural nationalism crystallized, mainly through Dayananda Saraswati and Swami Vivekananda.
• Dayananda Saraswati talked about a glorious Indian past and declared the Vedas as the epic source of knowledge for humanity, but he was also aware of the degeneration and the need for reform to create a new Indian identity.
• Dayananda’s philosophy reflected a great deal of British influence, praising the British for their confidence in dress, language, culture, and their respect for the idea of contract in personal relations.
• He wanted a cultural awakening and integration in India, preaching equality as the core of Indian tradition, promoting swadeshi and Hindustani as the lingua franca of the country.
• Dayananda argued that Indians were not inferior to the British and that within a revivalist framework, a better future for India as a nation was possible.
• Swami Vivekananda presented a dialectical relationship between Western civilization and Indian civilization, claiming both were partially complete. He argued the West lacked spirituality, while India lacked modern education and scientific inquiry.
• By the time Gandhi entered the political arena, the debate between Moderates and Extremists was nearly over, and the primacy of the social or political issues was resolved.
• The influence of the reform movements and the nationalist struggle integrated European ideas into Indian nationalist discourse, with Gandhi becoming the unifying force.
• Gandhi dismissed the idea that the attributes of a nation in India were of a recent origin due to British colonialism.
• Following the spirit of earlier cultural nationalism, Gandhi traced the idea of the Indian nation back to ancient heritage, demonstrating that India had been a nation long before the concept of nationalism or the nation-state in the West.
• The places of pilgrimage across India and the saints who became national figures through sacrifice and perseverance indicated that India had been a nation even before British rule.

India as a Nation

• Gandhi rejects the popular view that India became a nation under British rule and disputes the claim that India became a nation after the British introduced Western ideas and modern communication tools like railways and the telegraph.
• Gandhi argues that this is a British interpretation of Indian history and points out in Hind Swaraj (1909) that India was one nation even before the British came, with a shared mode of life and unity.
• Gandhi’s claim that India is a nation is based on two assumptions:

1. 1. Ancient Indian civilisation had the capacity to accommodate diversity and plurality.
   2. The acharyas (spiritual leaders) established pilgrimage centres to foster a sense of common identity across India.

• The ancient Indian civilisation was predominantly Hindu but open to non-Hindu values and ideas, with a long history of integrating new thoughts and values.
• Gandhi highlights that pilgrim centres like Haridwar, Rameshwaram, and Jagannath were not just for religious purposes but also to create a sense of national identity among Indians.
• Gandhi believes India’s strength lies in unity amidst diversity, acknowledging the existence of multiple languages and dialects, and advocates for Devanagari as the script for all provincial languages.
• He proposes Hindustani as the lingua franca of India, using either Persian or Nagari characters, believing that when people meet, their languages will merge and evolve.
• Gandhi argues that India cannot cease to be one nation because people of different religions live in it. The presence of foreigners and their merging into the nation does not destroy its unity.
• Gandhi stresses that nationality and religion are not synonymous, and that Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, and Christians who have made India their home must live in unity for the common good.
• He rejects the belief that the introduction of Mahomedanism unmade the nation, acknowledging differences between Hindus and Muslims but not seeing them as an obstacle to composite nationalism.
• Gandhi sees the presence of Muslims, Parsis, Sikhs, and Christians as an opportunity for accommodation rather than a challenge to Indian civilisation.
• He also asserts that religion should not be the basis of nationality. India’s unity is not dependent on religious uniformity but on the spirit of nationality.
• On the issue of language, Gandhi rejects Macaulay’s vision of English as the key to modern Indian identity.
• In a letter to Lord Ampthill, Gandhi declares that he no longer sees Macaulay as a benefactor and criticizes the education system he introduced, which, in Hind Swaraj, he claims has enslaved India.
• Gandhi accuses English-knowing Indians of enslaving India, claiming that the real curse lies with them, not the British.
• He rejects Macaulay’s thesis that Sanskrit and Persian have no value for India’s future, and that English should replace them. He views this as national suicide.
• While rejecting English as the foundation of Indian culture, Gandhi acknowledges its practical role in scientific education and inter-provincial communication.
• Gandhi insists that the mother-tongue should be the primary basis of cultural life in each province while recognizing the necessity of English to foster the growth of the mother-tongue.
• In Hind Swaraj, Gandhi emphasizes the improvement of all Indian languages and advocates translating valuable English books into various Indian languages.
• He argues that English should be used for scientific education, while mother-tongues should be the language for ethical education.
• Gandhi critiques the divide between the English-speaking elite and the masses speaking their respective mother-tongues, which leads to social differentiation and a sense of superiority among the elite and inferiority among the masses.
• Gandhi stresses that his criticism is not of the knowledge of English itself, but of the nefarious tendencies of the new Indian elite who look down on non-English speakers.
• Gandhi advocates for Hindi as the lingua franca for India, with the option of writing it in either Devanagari or Persian script, and encourages every cultured Indian to learn multiple languages.
• He proposes that Hindus learn Sanskrit, Muslims learn Arabic, Parsees learn Persian, and everyone learns Hindi.
• Gandhi also believes that certain Hindus should learn Arabic and Persian, some Muslims and Parsees should learn Sanskrit, and several Northerners and Westerners should learn Tamil.
• Gandhi consistently advocated for States based on language and supported the idea of linguistic redistribution of India, despite opposition in the Imperial Legislature in 1918.
• He proposed that to ensure people’s needs are met and the development of every part of the nation, linguistic division should be pursued.
• Gandhi’s vision encouraged Congress committees based on mother-tongue, which greatly energized the national movement.
• He was confident that Indian nationalism could provide the world with a model of a functioning multi-lingual and multi-religious nation.
• Gandhi, like Rammohun and Vivekananda, repeatedly stressed religious pluralism and the fundamental truth found in all great religions of the world.
• He urged his followers to remember that their own religion is the truest for them, even if it may rank low in philosophical comparisons.
• Gandhi’s encounter with missionaries in South Africa played a crucial role in shaping his ideas on religion.
• He was impressed by their willingness to discuss religious issues but rejected their narrow view that only one religion could be true.
• Gandhi viewed religious conversion as an ethical failure, believing that trying to remove people from one religion to another violated the integrity of family and community relationships.

Assessment of The Congress and The British Political Institutions and Practices

• In Hind Swaraj, Gandhi assesses the Indian National Congress from its inception until 1909, discussing its role and shortcomings.
• Gandhi acknowledges that the Congress was the first institution to inspire nationality in India and unite Indians from different regions, advocating for self-government and a foretaste of Home Rule.
• Despite its inadequacies, he argues it would be improper to dismiss the Congress, as doing so would retard the fulfilment of achieving true swaraj.
• Gandhi praises Dadabhai Naoroji as the Father of the Nation and credits his drain theory for showing how the British had drained India’s resources.
• He recognizes Gokhale’s embrace of poverty as a form of patriotism and Tyabji’s role in sowing the seed of Home Rule.
• Gandhi stresses that a nation desiring Home Rule cannot afford to disregard its ancestors and their contributions.
• He endorses the role of Hume and Wedderburn in the rise of Congress nationalism, asserting that Indians and British could work together to nourish Indian nationalism.
• Gandhi notes that many Englishmen desire Home Rule for India and that the British who made India their home deserve fair treatment, which the Extremists and Revolutionary nationalists deny.
• Gandhi criticizes the Extremists as retrograde and irresponsible and labels the anarchists and terrorists as a lunatic fringe in Indian politics.
• He rejects violence and supports the moderate elements in Congress advocating for constitutional methods.
• Gandhi models the Natal Indian Congress on the Indian National Congress and adopts the British practice of ‘prayer, petition, and protest’.
• Gandhi, influenced by early liberals like Rammohun, Gokhale, and Surendranath Bannerjee, believes the British connection with India is providential, and Indians are proud to be under the British crown.
• Gandhi has faith in the British love of justice and believes that the British constitutional practice of equality before law should apply to all, including Indians.
• He considers racial discrimination ‘un-British’ and insists it has no sanction under British constitutional practice.
• Gandhi differentiates between the localisms of the British bureaucracy in India and the broader British constitutional practice, which guarantees individual freedom and racial equality.
• He envisions India as a partner with the Empire and believes helping the British would enable India to qualify for swarajya or self-rule.
• In South Africa, Gandhi uses Satyagraha to remind the British that racial discrimination violates their constitutional principles.
• Gandhi’s technique of Satyagraha is based on the belief that redress of grievances can only be achieved by demonstrating a willingness to suffer.
• Gandhi draws inspiration from the British Suffragists, who waged a century-long struggle, showing that suffering and sacrifice led to political success.
• He states that an Englishman respects you only when you stand up to him, appealing to his conscience and making him acknowledge wrongdoing.
• Gandhi emphasizes that Satyagraha is most effective against the British, though it can be a method of conflict resolution globally.
• He notes that earnestness commands success in the British dominions, and the British, while slow, recognize and respond to unity and sacrifice.
• Gandhi stresses that united struggle of all people, irrespective of caste, creed, or religion, and non-violent resistance are key to the Indian struggle.
• Gandhi’s respect for British justice continued even after his return to India, as he recruited soldiers for the British army during World War I.
• Unlike Tilak and Jinnah, Gandhi supported the British war effort unconditionally, believing the British would reward India with self-rule.
• His faith in the British sense of justice was shattered by the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, though he maintained his belief in British parliamentary institutions.
• Gandhi’s ultimate aim was parliamentary swaraj, seeing it as a short-term goal while other changes were for the distant future.
• Although his faith in British fair play was shaken, Gandhi continued to believe in the feasibility of British parliamentary institutions.

Self-Rule: Need to Bridge the Gap Between Te Elite and the Massess

• For Gandhi, Nationalism means self-rule in which the entire community, not just the elite, is free and active, where soul force rather than brute force is the basis of public order, and national interest is the supreme ethical criterion of state action.
• He rejects the idea that a government by the national elite is beneficial simply because it is a government by the elite, as shown in his criticism of the Indian princes, whose tyranny he claims is worse than the British.
• Gandhi states that the tyranny of Indian princes is greater than that of the English in Hind Swaraj, calling attention to how the people under several princes are mercilessly crushed.
• He rejects the violent methods of Revolutionary nationalists, such as his criticism of Madan Lal Dhingra, saying those who rise to power by murder will not make the nation happy.
• Gandhi insists that soul force is more effective than brute force, citing Tulsidas’ message of compassion (daya) as the true foundation of dharma.
• He recognizes that state violence may be necessary but argues that it should only be exercised in the interest of the people as a whole, not just the national elite, and should be governed by daya (compassion).
• Gandhi stresses the need for a balance between daya (compassion) and national interest, criticising modern nationalism for its separation, which leads the elite to act detrimentally to the masses.
• He defines swaraj as both a mental and external condition.
• • Mental condition: (1) liberation from greed and power temptations offered by modern civilisation, (2) freedom from hatred toward the British, and (3) active love for the Indian masses.
  • External condition: (1) political independence from alien domination, and (2) dedication to improving the material conditions of poverty and caste oppression.
• Swaraj is not about replacing the English sahibs with Indian ‘brown’ sahibs; it is not about imitating English rule without the Englishman or transforming India into Englishstan.
• Gandhi compares his vision of freedom with Mazzini’s vision of Italian freedom, emphasizing that swaraj is about ensuring the happiness of millions of Indians, not just having control of the reins of government.
• Swaraj is not only about getting rid of the British, but also rejecting the fascination for modern civilisation that teaches the Indian elite to oppress the masses.
• Gandhi’s Hind Swaraj proposes nineteen points addressing the moral transformation of the Indian elite, urging them to serve the nation first and pursue money or status second.
• He believes that the pursuit of artha (money) must be within the framework of dharma, which involves using machinery for national development that supports the weak and poor, not just the wealthy and powerful.
• Gandhi’s emphasis on Khadi symbolises the need for national self-reliance and economic reform.
• Swaraj involves self-reform, constitutional reforms, and economic reforms. His commitment to truth teaches him the value of compromise, which he views as the essence of satyagraha.
• Swaraj and satyagraha are closely linked; satyagraha is the key to achieving swaraj, where self-rule is gained through voluntary self-sacrifice and civil disobedience.
• Gandhi stresses that the lofty goal of swaraj can only be achieved if the means used to achieve it are pure.
• Gandhi’s vision of swaraj is rooted in the village as the basic unit, emphasizing self-reliance and self-sufficiency.
  • The ideal village should produce its own food, cloth, and have reserves for cattle, playgrounds, schools, and water works.
  • Activities in the village should be carried out on a cooperative basis. Each village would be a republic or panchayat, fully self-sustained and capable of managing its affairs, even defending itself.
• In his speech at the Second Round Table Conference in 1931, Gandhi outlined a legislative organisation based on village representation, where villages elect representatives to form the electorate for the central legislature.
• Gandhi envisioned a model where the villages elect their own committees, which then elect taluk committees, district councils, and provincial councils to send representatives to the central legislature.
• Swadeshi could only be practised in the villages, where people lead simple lives without machinery, doctors, railways, or consumer goods.
• Tagore criticizes Gandhi’s emphasis on simplicity, claiming it would retard economic development and lead to isolationism and provincialism.
• Tagore questions Gandhi’s assertion that 80% of the Indian population were peasants with six months of unmeaningful work and argues that it is impractical for the middle class to spend their time spinning yarn.
• Gandhi responds by defending Indian nationalism as inclusive, non-aggressive, and humanitarian, emphasizing that it is not meant to harm other nations but to benefit all.
• Gandhi defends the use of the spinning wheel as a symbol of sacrifice for the nation and insists that Indian nationalism is not about narrow provincialism.
• Gandhi says, “I do not want my house to be walled in on all sides… I want the cultures of all lands to be blown off my feet by any,” showing that his nationalism is not exclusive.
• Gandhi rejects the idea of a nation as a transcendent entity with its own soul and form of freedom, instead viewing the nation as the sum of individual self-rule.
• Gandhi emphasizes that the swaraj of the people is the sum total of the swaraj of individuals, stressing social reform as essential to achieving swaraj.
• Among the key aims of social reform are the three pillars of swaraj: Hindu-Muslim unity, the abolition of untouchability, and the upliftment of villages in India.

The Rowlatt Act also known as the “Anarchical and Revolutionary Crimes Act of 1919” was enacted by the British government in order to strengthen their grip on power over the common people. The Imperial Legislative Council passed this law in March 1919, giving them the authority to arrest anyone without a trial. To abolish this act, Gandhi and other leaders called for a Hartal (work stoppage) to demonstrate Indians’ opposition to this rule, which became known as the Rowlatt Satyagraha. 

Background

• Following the end of World War I, the extremist faction in the Indian national movement was on the rise.
• The existing law, the Defence of India Act, was about to expire, and the British needed stronger measures to contain what they called terrorist elements who threatened their rule.
• The Rowlatt Act, passed by the British colonial government, gave police the authority to arrest anyone for any reason.
• The Act’s purpose was to quell the country’s growing nationalist upsurge. Gandhi called on the people to engage in satyagraha in protest of the act.
• The Rowlatt Committee Act, named after its president, Sir Sidney Rowlatt, was passed on the recommendations of the Rowlatt Committee and effectively authorised the colonial British government to imprison any person suspected of terrorism living in British India for up to two years, and gave the colonial authorities power to deal with all revolutionary activities.
• The unpopular legislation mandated stricter press control, warrantless arrests, indefinite detention without trial, and juryless in camera trials for prohibited political acts.
• The accused were denied the right to know who was accusing them and what evidence was used in the trial.
• Those convicted were required to deposit securities and were barred from participating in any political, educational, or religious activities after their release.
• On February 6, 1919, two bills were introduced in the Central Legislature based on the committee’s report, which was chaired by Justice Rowlatt. These bills became known as “Black Bills.”
• They gave the police enormous powers, including the ability to search a location and arrest anyone they disapproved of without a warrant.
• The Rowlatt Act was passed on March 18, 1919, despite widespread opposition.

Features

• The Anarchical and Revolutionary Crimes Act of 1919 also known as the Rowlatt Act was passed by the Imperial Legislative Council in March 1919.
• The British government was given the authority to arrest anyone suspected of terrorist activity under this act.
• It also authorized the government to detain such detainees for up to two years without charge or trial. It gave the police the authority to conduct a search without a warrant. It also severely hampered press freedom.
• The Rowlatt Committee, chaired by a judge named Sir Sidney Rowlatt, after whom the act is named, made recommendations that were followed.
• Indian leaders and the general public were outraged by the act. The bills were dubbed “black bills” as a result of their appearance.
• The act was passed despite the unanimous opposition of the council’s Indian members, who all resigned in protest. Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Madan Mohan Malviya, and Mazhar Ul Haq were among them.
• Gandhiji called a nationwide hartal on April 6th in response to this act. The Rowlatt Satyagraha was the name given to this protest.
• Gandhiji cancelled the movement after it was marred by rioting in some provinces, particularly in Punjab, where the situation was dire.
• The primary goal of the British government was to suppress the country’s growing nationalist movement.
• The British were also concerned about a Ghadarite revolution in Punjab and the rest of India.
• Satya Pal and Saifuddin Kitchlew, both popular Congress leaders, were detained.
• When the act went into effect, there was widespread outrage, and the army was dispatched to Punjab to deal with the situation.

Outcome

• The Rowlatt Act sparked the largest mass movement against British rule since the Revolt of 1857, and it served as the spark that ignited the movement for independence, which later spread throughout India and eventually led to independence.
• Gandhi was opposed to the Rowlatt Act and called for mass agitation and an all-India hartal, or strike, in which Indians closed their businesses and fasted to protest the British.
• People from all over the country signed a Satyagraha pledge to follow a nonviolent path. Gandhi’s hartal began on April 6, 1919, and was widely supported by the masses.
• The strike was successful in Delhi, but rioting and violence erupted in Punjab and other parts of India, forcing Gandhi to call a halt to the movement. He was disappointed to see that Indians were not prepared for nonviolent protest, which was the core principle of Satyagraha.
• On 10 April 1919, two Congress leaders, Dr. Satya Pal and Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlew, were arrested and taken to an unknown location as part of a protest movement.
• People gathered at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar on 13 April 1919 to protest this incident, which turned into one of the most heinous tragedies under British rule—the 1919 Jallianwala Bagh massacre.

Criticism

• Initially, Mahatma Gandhi was harshly critical of the Act, arguing that not everyone should be punished for isolated political crimes.
• The Act also enraged many other Indian leaders and the general public, prompting the government to take repressive measures.
• The Act empowered the government to imprison anyone suspected of terrorist activity for up to two years without a trial.
• It also allowed for indefinite preventive detention and arrest without a warrant. Other provisions included jury-free trials for prohibited political acts.
• Convicted individuals were required to deposit securities upon their release, as well as refrain from participating in any political, religious, or educational activities.
• The Rowlatt Act also severely restricted press freedom.
• The bill was opposed by all Indian members of the Imperial Legislative Council. Regardless, the bill was passed.

Conclusion

The Rowlatt Act sparked the largest mass movement against British rule since the Revolt of 1857, and it served as the spark that ignited the movement for independence, which later spread throughout India and eventually led to independence. The Rowlatt Act was enacted to quell public unrest and thwart anti-British conspiracies. This act empowered the British government to imprison anyone suspected of terrorist activity without a trial for a minimum of two years. Gandhi’s position as a leader of the nationalist movement was bolstered further by his actions in opposition to the Rowlatt Act. Gandhi organized a strike in which Indians would close their businesses as a form of protest.

Introduction

• The Khilafat movement (1919–22) was a political campaign launched by Indian Muslims in British India over the British policy against Turkey and the planned dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire after World War I by the Allied forces.
• Leaders in the movement included Ahmad Sagheer Haji Variyami, Shaukat Ali, Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar, Hakim Ajmal Khan, and Abul Kalam Azad who organised the movement to address the grievances of Turkey.
• Mahatma Gandhi supported the movement as part of his opposition to the British Empire, also advocating for a broader non-cooperation movement simultaneously.
• Vallabhbhai Patel, Bal Gangadhar Tilak, and other Hindu and Congress figures also supported the movement.
• The movement is generally described as a protest against the sanctions placed on the Ottoman Empire after World War I by the Treaty of Sèvres.
• The movement is also noted for promoting Hindu-Muslim unity.
• The movement ended in 1922 after the conclusion of the non-cooperation movement.

Background

• Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II (1842–1918) launched his pan-Islamist program to protect the Ottoman Empire from Western attack and dismemberment and to suppress democratic opposition at home.
• He sent Jamaluddin Afghani, an emissary, to India in the late 19th century to garner support.
• The cause of the Ottoman monarch evoked religious passion and sympathy among Indian Muslims.
• As the caliph, the Ottoman sultan was nominally the supreme religious and political leader of all Sunni Muslims across the world, although this authority was rarely used.
• A large number of Muslim religious leaders began spreading awareness and encouraging Muslim participation on behalf of the caliphate.
• Maulana Mehmud Hasan, a Muslim religious leader, attempted to organize a national war of independence with support from the Ottoman Empire.
• Abdul Hamid II was forced to restore the constitutional monarchy, marking the start of the Second Constitutional Era with the Young Turk Revolution.
• He was succeeded by his brother Mehmed V (1844–1918), but after the revolution, the real power in the Ottoman Empire lay with the Young Turks.
• The Young Turk movement was discussed in the Conference of London (February 1920); however, nationalist Arabs saw it as a threat to the continuation of Turkish dominance over Arab lands.

Partitioning

• The Ottoman Empire, having sided with the Central Powers during World War I, suffered a major military defeat.
• The Treaty of Versailles (1919) reduced the Ottoman Empire’s territorial extent and political influence but promised to protect the Ottoman sultan’s status as caliph.
• Under the Treaty of Sèvres (1920), territories like Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq were severed from the Ottoman Empire.
• Within Turkey, a progressive, secular nationalist movement arose, known as the Turkish national movement.
• During the Turkish War of Independence (1919–1923), the Turkish revolutionaries, led by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, abolished the Treaty of Sèvres with the Treaty of Lausanne (1923).
• Following Atatürk’s Reforms, the Republic of Turkey abolished the position of the caliphate in 1924.
• Atatürk offered the caliphate to Ahmed Sharif as-Senussi, on the condition that he reside outside Turkey; however, Senussi declined and supported Abdulmejid.
• The title of caliph was claimed by Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca and Hejaz, leader of the Arab Revolt, but his kingdom was defeated and annexed by Ibn Saud in 1925.

Khilafat Movement in Indian Subcontinent

• Political activities and popular outcry on behalf of the caliphate emerged across the Muslim world, with the most prominent activities taking place in India.
• Maulana Muhammad Ali Johar, an Oxford-educated Muslim journalist, had spent four years in prison advocating resistance to the colonial government and support for the caliphate.
• At the onset of the Turkish War of Independence, Muslim religious leaders feared for the caliphate, which the European powers were reluctant to protect.
• Some Muslims of India were opposed to being conscripted to fight against fellow Muslims in Turkey.
• The Khilafat movement was seen by its founders and followers as a show of solidarity with Muslims in Turkey, not as a religious movement.
• Mohammad Ali and his brother Maulana Shaukat Ali, along with other Muslim leaders like Pir Ghulam Mujaddid Sarhandi, Sheikh Shaukat Ali Siddiqui, Dr. Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari, Raees-Ul-Muhajireen Barrister Jan Muhammad Junejo, Hasrat Mohani, Syed Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari, Mohammad Farooq Chishti, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, and Dr. Hakim Ajmal Khan, formed the All India Khilafat Committee.
• The Khilafat Committee was based in Lucknow, India, at the compound of Shaukat Ali Siddiqui, and aimed to build political unity amongst Muslims to protect the caliphate.
• In 1920, the Khilafat Committee published the Khilafat Manifesto, calling on the British to protect the caliphate and for Indian Muslims to unite and hold the British accountable.
• The Khilafat Committee in Bengal included Mohammad Akram Khan, Manruzzaman Islamabadi, Mujibur Rahman Khan, and Chittaranjan Das.
• In 1920, an alliance was made between Khilafat leaders and the Indian National Congress, with Mahatma Gandhi and the Khilafat leaders agreeing to work together for Khilafat and Swaraj.
• The Khilafatists became a major part of the non-cooperation movement, a nationwide campaign of mass, peaceful civil disobedience.
• Some participants in the movement emigrated from North-West Frontier Province to Afghanistan under Amanullah Khan.
• Indians also made donations to support the movement, and a committee was started to send funds to help the Ankara government of Mustafa Kemal.
• The non-cooperation campaign was initially successful, starting with boycotts of legislative councils, government schools, colleges, and foreign goods, and included massive protests, strikes, and acts of civil disobedience.
• Hindus and Muslims joined forces in the campaign, which was initially peaceful.
• Gandhi, the Ali brothers, and others were arrested by the colonial government.
• The Tehrik-e-Khilafat led by a Punjab Khilafat deputation comprising Moulana Manzoor Ahmed and Moulana Lutfullah Khan Dankauri took a leading role, particularly in Punjab (Sirsa, Lahore, Haryana).
• The Khilafat movement weakened as Muslims became divided between supporting the Congress, the Khilafat cause, and the Muslim League.
• The Khilafat leadership fragmented along different political lines, with Syed Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari forming Majlis-e-Ahrar-e-Islam with Chaudhry Afzal Haq.
• Leaders like Dr. Ansari, Maulana Azad, and Hakim Ajmal Khan remained strong supporters of Gandhi and the Congress.
• The Ali brothers joined the Muslim League.

Challenges to British Colonization

• Up to the turn of the 20th century, the British system of political control was effective in Sindh.
• During the Khilafat movement, the British faced another major challenge to their rule in Sindh.
• The Khilafat movement marked the first occasion when a large number of Sindhi pirs came together on a common platform to oppose British policy.
• Their involvement demonstrated how Sindhi pirs were gradually being engaged in the broader issues of the Indian Muslim community.
• Many of these pirs were influenced by the rise in pan-Islamic sentiment and the changing awareness of the position of Muslims in South Asia.
• The participation of these pirs in the agitation severely threatened the British colonial rule in Sindh.
• Despite the significant influence of the pirs and the considerable support for the Khilafat cause, the British system of control remained effective, reducing the threat to manageable proportions.
• The British system was seriously threatened by the involvement of Sindhi pirs in the Khilafat movement.
• The movement’s concerns strongly appealed to a major section of the province’s religious leadership due to the rise in interest in pan-Islamic issues leading up to 1919.
• Support for broader Islamic concerns was associated with the gradual erosion of the barriers that had isolated the Sindh region from developments elsewhere.

Legacy

• The Khilafat movement played a role in boosting Hindu-Muslim unity.
• The Congress supported the movement in response to the divide and rule strategy by the British.
• The period from 1919-1922 is seen as the heyday of Hindu-Muslim unity.
• Mustafa Kemal Atatürk thanked the Congress for its sympathy and hoped it would soon gain Swaraj.
• The movement is seen as a milestone in the growth of Muslim nationalism and the history of civil disobedience in India.
• Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who had been a force for Hindu-Muslim unity after the 1916 Lucknow Pact, left the Congress due to its failure to heed his caution about the entanglement of the secular independence movement with the religious elements of the Khilafat movement.
• Jinnah later became a key leader of the Pakistan Movement.
• Critics argue that the Khilafat movement was not truly nationalist or anti-imperialist and that its religious rhetoric concealed a weak and uncertain religious agenda.
• Omair Anas, writing for Daily Sabah, noted that it is impossible to recall Turkey’s anti-colonial struggle without mentioning Gandhi’s support for the unity and integrity of the Ottoman Empire.

Introduction

• The non-cooperation movement was launched on 4 September 1920 by Mahatma Gandhi to persuade the British government to grant self-governance to Indians.
• The movement resulted from the Indian National Congress (INC) withdrawing support for British reforms following the Rowlatt Act of 18 March 1919, which suspended rights of political prisoners in sedition trials.
• The Rowlatt Act led to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre on 13 April 1919, which intensified Indian political awareness and resistance.
• Gandhi’s non-cooperation movement was one of his first organized acts of large-scale satyagraha.
• Gandhi’s strategy included persuading Indians to withdraw labour from any activity supporting the British government and economy, including British industries and educational institutions.
• The movement called for non-violent means or ahimsa, including boycotting British goods, using local handicrafts, and picketing liquor shops.
• Gandhi advocated for self-reliance, which involved spinning khadi, buying only Indian-made goods, and boycotting British goods.
• The movement also supported the Khilafat Movement (oppose dismemberment of Turkey) and called for the end of untouchability.
• The movement resulted in strikes (hartals) and the first arrests of Jawaharlal Nehru and his father Motilal Nehru on 6 December 1921.
• The non-cooperation movement was part of the broader movement for Indian independence from British rule.
• The movement ended on 4 February 1922 after the Chauri Chaura incident, where a crowd of protesters, after being fired upon by the police, burned down the police station, killing the shooters and others inside.
• Gandhi called off the movement after the incident, even though it was initially intended to be non-violent.
• Despite being called off, the movement marked the transition of Indian nationalism from a middle-class basis to involving the masses.

Causes 

• The non-cooperation movement was a reaction to the oppressive policies of the British Indian government, such as the Rowlatt Act of 18 March 1919 and the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre of 13 April 1919.
• The Rowlatt Act suspended the rights of political prisoners in sedition trials, motivating Gandhi to conceive the idea of satyagraha (truth), which he saw as synonymous with independence.
• Gandhi’s motivation was further solidified by the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, where a large crowd gathered to protest the arrest of Saifuddin Kitchlew and Dr. Satyapal and to attend the Baisakhi festival. The crowd was fired upon by soldiers under Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer, killing and injuring thousands.
• The massacre led to widespread unrest, with more deaths caused by police violence, making it one of the most infamous events of British rule in India.
• Gandhi, a preacher of nonviolence, was horrified by the massacre and lost all faith in the British government, declaring it a “sin” to cooperate with the “satanic” government.
• Gandhi’s ideologies of satyagraha were endorsed by Jawaharlal Nehru, who also believed that nothing short of independence was acceptable after the massacre.
• Gandhi’s ideas were influenced by ongoing non-cooperation movements, particularly those by Satguru Ram Singh, who was the first to use non-cooperation and boycott of British goods as a political weapon.
• In response to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre and other violence in Punjab, the movement aimed to secure Swaraj (independence) for India. Gandhi promised Swaraj within one year if the non-cooperation programme was fully implemented.
• Gandhi lost faith in constitutional methods and shifted from being a cooperator with British rule to a non-cooperator advocating for Indian independence from colonialism.
• The movement was also driven by economic hardships faced by the common Indian citizen due to economic exploitation by the British, the decline of Indian artisans due to British factory-made goods, and conscription used by the British Indian Army to gather recruits during World War I.

Movement

• The non-cooperation movement aimed to challenge the colonial economic and power structure, forcing British authorities to take notice of the demands of the independence movement.
• Gandhi called for a nationwide protest against the Rowlatt Act, promoting “self-reliance” by urging Indians to withdraw their labor from activities sustaining the British government and economy in India, including industries and educational institutions.
• Through non-violent means (ahimsa), protesters would:
  • Refuse to buy British goods.
  • Adopt the use of local handicrafts (e.g., spinning khadi).
  • Picket liquor shops.
  • Close all offices and factories.
  • Withdraw from Raj-sponsored schools, police services, the military, and the civil service.
  • Boycott public transportation and English-manufactured goods.
  • Return honours and titles given by the government and resign from various posts (e.g., teachers, lawyers, civil and military services).
• The movement also called for the end to untouchability.
• Publicly-held meetings and strikes (hartals) during the movement led to the first arrests of Jawaharlal Nehru and his father, Motilal Nehru, on 6 December 1921.
• Early political leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak (Congress Extremists) supported major public meetings, which often resulted in disorder and obstruction of government services, leading to imprisonment for leaders like Tilak and V.O. Chidambaram Pillai.
• Veteran leaders such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bipin Chandra Pal, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, and Annie Besant opposed the idea, as did the All India Muslim League.
• The younger generation of Indian nationalists supported Gandhi’s movement, which was adopted by the Congress Party in September 1920 and launched in December 1920.
• Gandhi strengthened the movement by supporting the Khilafat Movement, receiving extensive support from Indian-Muslim leaders like Maulana Azad, Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari, Hakim Ajmal Khan, Maghfoor Ahmad Ajazi, Abbas Tyabji, Maulana Muhammad Ali Jauhar, and Maulana Shaukat Ali.
• The prominent writer, poet, and nationalist Rambriksh Benipuri described the Non-Cooperation era of 1921 as a storm that upturned the foundations of Indian society, with ferment and loud echoes across villages and cities.

Impact and Suspension

• The impact of the revolt was a total shock to British authorities and a massive boost to millions of Indian nationalists.
• Unity in the country was strengthened, and many Indian schools and colleges were created.
• Indian goods were encouraged.
• On 4 February 1922, a massacre occurred at Chauri Chaura in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, when a police officer attacked volunteers picketing a liquor shop.
• The crowd of peasants went to the police chowki (station) and set it on fire, killing around 22 policemen inside.
• About 30 mobs participated in the incident.
• The cruelty of the event made Gandhi rethink the movement’s direction.
• Gandhi felt the revolt was veering off-course and was disappointed with the rise of violence.
• Gandhi did not want the movement to become a contest of violence between the police and angry mobs, victimizing civilians.
• Gandhi appealed to the Indian public to end the resistance, went on a fast, and on 12 February 1922, called off the non-cooperation movement.
• Gandhi believed in STS (struggle, truce, struggle), where after a phase of struggle, there should be a resting phase to recover power and rise stronger.
• Though not explicitly mentioned, all movements led by Gandhi were withdrawn by him after a year or two.

End of non-cooperation

• The non-cooperation movement was withdrawn after the Chauri Chaura incident.
• Despite stopping the national revolt single-handedly, on 12 February 1922, Mahatma Gandhi was arrested.
• On 18 March 1922, Gandhi was imprisoned for six years for publishing seditious materials.
• This led to the suppression of the movement and the arrest of other leaders.
• Most Congress leaders remained firmly behind Gandhi, but some determined leaders broke away, including the Ali brothers (Shaukat Ali and Mohammad Ali Jouhar).
• Motilal Nehru and Chittaranjan Das formed the Swaraj Party, rejecting Gandhi’s leadership.
• Many nationalists felt the non-cooperation movement should not have been stopped due to isolated incidents of violence.
• While most nationalists retained confidence in Gandhi, they were discouraged.

Aftermath

• Gandhi’s commitment to nonviolence was redeemed between 1930 and 1934 with the Salt Satyagraha.
• The movement garnered the support of tens of millions and made India’s cause famous worldwide for its unerring adherence to non-violence.
• The Satyagraha ended in success, with the demands of Indians being met.
• The Congress was recognized as a representative of the Indian people.
• The Government of India Act 1935 gave India its first taste of democratic self-governance.

The Swaraj Party was founded in January 1923, following the Gaya session of the Indian National Congress in December 1922. Its main objective was to secure greater self-governance and political freedom for Indians under British rule, grounded in the idea of “Swaraj,” meaning “self-rule” or “independence.”

Leaders like C. R. Das and Motilal Nehru advocated for working within the legislative councils to push for reforms. Consequently, in the 1923 Bengal Legislative Council elections, the Swaraj Party achieved significant success. However, after the death of C. R. Das, the Swaraj party began to decline.

Swaraj Party Overview

The Swaraj Party, also known as the Congress-Khilafat Swarajya Party, was established on January 1, 1923, by Chittaranjan Das and Motilal Nehru. The party emerged in response to Mahatma Gandhi’s suspension of the Non-Cooperation Movement after the Chauri Chaura incident in 1922, where violent clashes resulted in the deaths of several policemen. Gandhi halted the movement, stressing non-violence and constructive work.

• Frustration Over the Suspension: The suspension of the Non-Cooperation Movement frustrated many Congress members who believed the movement was at its peak and that its abrupt withdrawal was premature.
• Split Within Congress: The dissatisfaction with Gandhi’s decision caused a rift within the Indian National Congress, leading to the formation of the Swaraj Party.
• Goals of the Swaraj Party: The Swaraj Party aimed to achieve self-rule (Swaraj) and greater political freedom for Indians by entering legislative councils to obstruct British policies and press for reforms from within the system.
• Strategic Shift in Independence Struggle: The creation of the Swaraj Party marked a strategic shift in India’s struggle for independence, reflecting growing political fervour and discontent with British rule during the colonial era.

Swaraj Party Formation

The Swaraj Party was formed in January 1923, following a disagreement within the Congress over the issue of council entry. This agreement led to the emergence of two factions within INC: Swarajists and No-Changers:

• Swarajists: Led by C.R. Das and Motilal Nehru, the Swarajists advocated for entering legislative councils to expose their weaknesses and use them as a platform for political struggle.
• No Changers: The other group came to be known as No Changers led by C. Rajagopalachari, Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, and M.A. Ansari opposed council entry and advocated for constructive work and the continuation of boycott and non-cooperation.
• “End or Mend”: The disagreement regarding council entry between the two factions led to the rejection of the Swarajists’ proposal to either “end or mend” the councils during the Congress session in Gaya in December 1922.

The Emergence of Congress-Khilafat Swarajists

• Following Gandhi’s arrest in March 1922, nationalist ranks disintegrated, disorganized, and demoralized. A debate began among Congressmen about what to do during the transition period, also known as the movement’s passive phase.
• One group, led by C.R. Das, Motilal Nehru, and Ajmal Khan, wanted to end the boycott of legislative councils so that nationalists could enter them to expose the fundamental flaws of these assemblies and use them as a forum for political struggle to rouse popular support.
• They wanted to ‘end or mend’ these councils, which meant that if the government did not respond to the nationalists’ demands, they would obstruct the councils’ work.
• Those advocating entry into legislative councils became known as the ‘Swarajists,’ while those opposing entry became known as the ‘Nochangers,’ led by C. Rajagopalachari, Vallabhbhai Patel, Rajendra Prasad, and M.A. Ansari.
• The ‘No-changers’ advocated for a focus on constructive work, the continuation of the boycott and non-cooperation, and quiet preparation for the resumption of the suspended civil disobedience programme.
• The Swarajists’ proposal of ‘ending or mending’ the councils was defeated at the Gaya session of the Congress due to disagreements between the two schools of thought on the issue of council entry (December 1922).
• C.R. Das and Motilal Nehru resigned from their positions as president and secretary of the Congress, respectively, and announced the formation of the Congress-Khilafat Swarajya Party, or simply Swarajist Party, with C.R. Das as president and Motilal Nehru as one of the secretaries.

Swaraj Party Objectives

The Swaraj Party, formed in January 1923, sought to use legislative councils as platforms for political struggle and to expose the shortcomings of British governance. The objectives of the Swaraj Party are as follows:

• To obtain the right to form a constitution that aligns with the country’s conditions and aspirations.
• The party strived to attain Swaraj (self-rule)as a means to empower the Indian populace and assert their political rights.

Swaraj Party Leaders

Following the defeat of the Swarajists’ proposals, C.R. Das and Motilal Nehru resigned from their Congress positions and subsequently formed the Swaraj Party. C.R. Das became the president of the Swaraj Party, while Motilal Nehru served as its secretary.

Swaraj Party in Elections

The Swarajists were permitted to contest elections as a faction within the Congress. They agreed to the Congress program, except for their intention to join legislative councils. Elections for the newly formed Central Legislative Assembly and provincial assemblies were scheduled for November 1923.

• The Swarajist Manifesto, issued in October 1923, took a strong anti-imperialist stance. It claimed the British governed India for selfish interests, disguising reforms to exploit India’s resources and keep Indians subordinate.
  • The Party pledged to advocate for self-government within councils. If refused, they would obstruct governance to create deadlocks on legislative measures.
• The Swaraj Party contested the 1923 and 1926 elections. In 1923, they secured 42 out of 141 seats, achieving a majority in the Central Provinces and becoming the largest party in the Central Assembly, Bombay, and Bengal.
  • However, in 1926, they performed poorly, winning only 40 seats in the Centre and a few in Madras.

Swarajist Arguments

• Entering the councils would not negate the noncooperation program; rather, it would be like continuing the movement in a different way by opening a new front.
• During a political vacuum, council work would serve to enthuse the masses and keep morale high.
• The presence of nationalists would deter the government from populating the councils with undesirable elements who could be used to legitimise government actions.
• There was no intention of using the councils as organs for gradual transformation of colonial rule; they could be used as a venue for political struggle.

Swarajist Manifesto for Elections

• The British governing India were guided by the selfish interests of their own country.
• The so-called reforms were merely a ruse to further the aforementioned interests under the guise of granting a responsible government, the true goal being to continue exploitation of the country’s unlimited resources by keeping Indians permanently subservient to Britain.
• The Swarajists would present the nationalist demand for self-government in councils; if this demand was rejected, they would implement a policy of uniform, continuous, and consistent obstruction within the councils to make governance through councils impossible.
• Councils would thus be destroyed from within by creating deadlocks on every measure.

Swarajists Activities in Councils

• The Swarajist position gradually weakened as a result of widespread communal riots and a split among Swarajists along communal and Responsivist-Non-Responsivist lines.
• The government’s strategy of dividing Swarajists—the more militant from the moderate, Hindus from Muslims—was successful.
• Many Muslims abandoned the Swarajists after the party refused to support the tenants’ cause against the zamindars in Bengal (most of the tenants were Muslims).
• Communal interests also joined the party. The death of C.R. Das in 1925 weakened it even more.
• Swarajists who advocated cooperation with the government and holding office wherever possible included Lala Lajpat Rai, Madan Mohan Malaviya, and N.C. Kelkar. They also wished to safeguard so-called Hindu interests.
• The communal elements accused leaders such as Motilal Nehru, who opposed joining the council, of being anti-Hindu, while Muslim communalists accused the Swarajists of being anti-Muslim.
• Thus, the main leadership of the Swarajist Party reaffirmed their belief in mass civil disobedience and withdrew from legislatures in March 1926, while another section of the Swarajists entered the 1926 elections as a party in disarray and did not fare well overall.
• They won 40 seats in the Centre and some seats in Madras, but were defeated in the United Provinces, Central Provinces, and Punjab.
• The Swarajists finally walked out in 1930 as a result of the Lahore Congress resolution on purna swaraj and the start of the Civil Disobedience Movement.

Swaraj Party and Gandhi

• Gandhi initially opposed Swarajist council entry. However, after being released from prison for health reasons in February 1924, he gradually moved toward reconciliation with the Swarajists.
• He believed that public opposition to the council entry programme would be ineffective.
• The Swarajists won 42 out of 141 elected seats and a clear majority in the Central Provinces provincial assembly in November 1923. They won a majority in legislatures by working with the Liberals and independents such as Jinnah and Malaviya.
• The Swarajists’ courageous and uncompromising approach convinced him that they would not become just another limb of colonial administration.
• Toward the end of 1924, the government cracked down on revolutionary terrorists and Swarajists, which enraged Gandhi, and he expressed his solidarity with the Swarajists by surrendering to their wishes.
• Both sides agreed in 1924 (ratified at the Congress session in Belgaum in December 1924, which Gandhi presided over for the first time) that the Swarajists would work in the councils as an integral part of the Congress.

Swaraj Party Activities

The Swaraj Party activities made a significant contribution to nationalist politics, but they had limitations. Motilal Nehru admitted that Swarajist politics had not advanced the country towards Swaraj. The government could easily override the Swaraj Party’s opposition in the Assembly using special powers granted by the Government of India Act 1919. This made the Swaraj Party’s opposition ineffective in the Assembly.

Achievements and Drawbacks

Achievements

• They outvoted the government several times, including on budgetary grants, and passed adjournment motions with coalition partners.
• They agitated through powerful speeches on self-government, civil liberties, and industrialization.
• Vithalbhai Patel was elected speaker of the Central Legislative Assembly in 1925.
• A notable accomplishment was the defeat of the Public Safety Bill in 1928, which sought to empower the government to deport undesirable and subversive foreigners.
• They filled a political void at a time when the national movement was regaining strength.
• They exposed the Montford scheme’s hollowness.
• They demonstrated how councils could be used creatively.

Drawbacks

• The Swarajists lacked a strategy for coordinating their militancy within legislatures with the mass struggle outside. They communicated with the public entirely through newspaper reporting.
• An obstructionist strategy had drawbacks.
• They were unable to progress with their coalition partners due to competing ideas, which further limited their effectiveness.
• They were unable to resist the benefits and privileges of power and position.
• They failed to support the peasants’ cause in Bengal and lost support among their Muslim constituents.

Swaraj Party Significance

The Swaraj Party played a significant role in the Indian independence struggle. The party participated in legislative councils, advocating for constitutional reforms and voicing Indian grievances, which helped them become a major force in provincial elections.

• Bridging Gaps: Aimed to bridge the gap between extremists and moderates within the Indian National Congress and supported the Civil Disobedience Movement.
• Influence: Their experience in legislative advocacy influenced later leaders and parties in independent India.
• Diverse Strategies: Highlighted the diverse strategies employed in the Indian National Movement through involvement in legislative councils and pursuit of responsible government.

Overall, these efforts contributed to the momentum that ultimately led to India’s independence in 1947.

Swaraj Party Decline

By the time the 1926 elections took place, the political atmosphere in the country had shifted significantly, which was likely to impact the future of the Swaraj Party. The party faced several drawbacks, including internal divisions, diminishing public support, and an inability to effectively challenge the government, all of which contributed to the decline of the Swaraj Party.

• Lack of coordination: The Swaraj Party failed to coordinate their legislative activities with the mass struggle outside, relying solely on newspaper reports for communication.
• Obstructionist strategy: The Swaraj Party’s obstructionist approach had limitations and did not achieve significant results.
• Coalition challenges: Conflicting ideas with coalition partners limited their effectiveness.
• Failure to resist power and privileges: Members of the Swaraj Party succumbed to the temptations of power and office.
• Failure to support peasants: The Swaraj Party’s failure to support peasants in Bengal alienated religious minority members who were pro-peasant.

Muddiman Committee (1924)

• In response to the demand of Indian leaders and in light of the resolution adopted by the Swaraj Party in the early 1920s, the British Government established a committee headed by Sir Alexander Muddinman.
• It also advocated for the establishment of a Royal Commission.
• To meet the demand of Indian leaders and in light of the resolution adopted by the Swaraj Party in the early 1920s, the British government established the Muddinman Committee, led by Sir Alexander Muddinman.
• Apart from British members, the Committee had four Indian members.

Committee members who were Indian

• Sir Sivaswami Aiyar
• Dr. R P Paranjape
• Sir Tejbahadur Sapru
• Mohammad Ali Jinnah

Conclusion

Despite the obstacles and changing socio-political climate, the Swarajists managed to achieve and strengthen their hold for a period of time, giving momentum to the emerging nationalist movement. They played a significant role in public discourse and legislation, which served as a guiding principle for future national movement leaders such as J.Nehru. It also served as a springboard for numerous other forms of struggle, such as peasant movements, trade movements, and so on, in the near future.

On April 6, 1930, M.K. Gandhi formally launched the Civil Disobedience Movement by picking a handful of salt after completing the historic ‘Dandi March’ from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi, thus violating the government’s salt law. He was a driving force behind the movement, inspiring grassroots participation in the liberation struggle. The Civil Disobedience Movement spread across the country as a result of the defiance of the salt law. Salt production spread across the country during the first phase of the civil disobedience movement, and it became a symbol of the people’s defiance of the government.

Background

• To carry out the mandate given by the Lahore Congress, Gandhi presented the government with 11 demands and gave a deadline of January 31, 1930 to accept or reject these demands.
• With no positive response from the government to these demands, Gandhi was given full authority to launch the Civil Disobedience Movement at a time and place of his choosing by the Congress Working Committee.
• By the end of February, Gandhi had decided to make salt the movement’s central formula.
• The celebration of Independence Day in 1930 was followed by the launch of the Civil Disobedience Movement, led by Gandhi.
• It all started with Gandhi’s famous Dandi March. On March 12, 1930, Gandhi set out on foot from the Sabarmati Ashram in Ahmedabad with 78 other Ashram members for Dandi, a village on India’s western seacoast about 385 kilometres from Ahmedabad.
• They arrived in Dandi on April 6, 1930. Gandhi broke the salt law there. Because salt was a government monopoly, it was illegal for anyone to produce it.
• Gandhi defied the government by picking up a handful of salt that had formed as a result of sea evaporation.

Features

• This was the first nationwide movement, as all previous ones had been restricted to cities.
• People in rural areas could also register to participate.
• The event drew a large number of female participants.
• The satyagraha movement was led by well-known women such as Kasturba Gandhi, Kamaladevi Chattopadhyay, Avantikabai Gokhale, Lilavati Munshi, and Hansaben Mehta.
• Nonviolence was the movement’s motto.
• Despite constant British repression, this movement persisted.

Causes

• The unrest in social and political situations aided in the formation of the civil disobedience movement.
• Simon commission, which was formed by the British government in 1927 to formalise India’s constitution and was entirely composed of British members, was rejected by the Indian National Congress and other political and social organisations and was dubbed the all white commission.
• In 1928, a new constitution was drafted in Calcutta by a committee led by Motilal Nehru. The INC demanded that the British government accept Nehru’s Report in 1928.
• The main theme of the report was to give India Dominion Status. It warned and blackmailed the British government that if they did not accept the report, they would be threatened and a civil disobedience movement would be launched.
• The main goal of the constitutional reform, according to the Governor General of India, Lord Irwin, was to Grant India dominion status.
• Following the declaration, Gandhi and other leaders proposed a round table conference to resolve the constitutional crisis, and when the British government did not respond positively to any of their demands, the civil disobedience movement was launched.

Dandi March (Salt Satyagraha)

• For a long time, Mahatma Gandhi was planning a mass movement along the lines of the Civil Disobedience Movement.
• He was looking for a symbol around which the entire movement could be centred and he hit upon the idea of salt as a tax on salt, in his opinion, was the most oppressive form of tax which humankind could devise since salt was a basic necessity of human existence, just like air and water.
• As a result, breaking salt laws would be the most appropriate way to launch the Civil Disobedience Movement.
• The Dandi March began on March 12, 1930, from Sabarmati Ashram in Gujarat to the coastal village of Dandi, a distance of approximately 390 kilometres. Gandhi and 78 followers set out on foot for Dandi.
• They travelled from Sabarmati Ashram to Dandi in 25 days and arrived on the Dandi coast on April 6, 1930, where Gandhi broke the salt laws and launched the mass Civil Disobedience Movement by picking up a handful of salt.
• Sarojini Naidu was one of the leaders who travelled with Mahatma Gandhi on the Dandi March.

Spread of Civil Disobedience Movement

• After Gandhi’s ritual at Dandi paved the way, defiance of the salt laws spread throughout the country.
• Nehru’s arrest in April 1930 for violating the salt law sparked massive protests in Madras, Calcutta, and Karachi. Gandhi was arrested on May 4, 1930, after announcing that he would lead a raid on the Dharasana Salt Works on India’s west coast.
• Following Gandhi’s arrest, there were massive protests in Bombay, Delhi, Calcutta, and Sholapur, where the response was the most ferocious.
• Following Gandhi’s arrest, the CWC sanctioned the following actions:
  • non-payment of revenue in ryotwari areas;
  • a no-chowkidari-tax campaign in zamindari areas; and
  • a violation of forest laws in the Central Provinces.
• Students, women, tribals, merchants and petty traders, workers and peasants from all walks of life were all involved in the CDM.
• Salt laws were also flouted in a number of provinces, with varying degrees of success.
• C Rajagopalachari led the Salt Satyagraha in Tamil Nadu, K Kelappan in Malabar, and Sarojini Naidu and Manilal Gandhi in Dharasana Salt Works (Gujarat).
• The defiance of salt laws at Dharasana salt works was notable for its scale, with a group of 2000 volunteers offering nonviolent resistance in the face of a large police force armed with steel-tipped lathis, which attacked non-resisting Satyagrahis (protestors) until they fell down.
• The Gandhi-Irwin agreement effectively ended the civil disobedience movement. It was signed on March 5, 1931, by Mahatma Gandhi and Lord Irwin, the then-Viceroy of India.

Impact

• The civil disobedience movement had a far-reaching impact. It instilled distrust in the British government and laid the groundwork for the freedom struggle, as well as popularising new methods of propaganda such as the Prabhat, pheris, pamphlets, and so on.
• Following forest law defiance in Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Central Province, as well as refusal to pay the rural ‘Chaukidari tax’ in Eastern India, the government abolished the oppressive salt tax.
• Foreign imports of clothing and cigarettes were cut in half. Government revenue from land revenue and liquor excise were also reduced.
• Women and students participated in large numbers in the movement, which was a liberating experience for Indian women who were entering public space in such large numbers for the first time.

Drawbacks

• Muslims were less likely to participate as a result of the advice of communal leaders and the government’s efforts to promote communalism as a response to nationalism.
• Except in Nagpur, industrial workers did not participate in large numbers.

Government Response

• Throughout 1930, the government’s attitude was ambivalent, as it was puzzled and perplexed.
• It faced the classic dilemma where if force was used, the Congress cried ‘repression,’ while if little action was taken, the Congress cried ‘victory. In either case, the government’s power was eroded.
• Gandhi’s arrest, too, came after much deliberation. However, once the repression began, the ordinances prohibiting civil liberties were freely used, including the gagging of the press.
• Provincial governments now have the authority to prohibit civil disobedience organisations. However, the Congress Working Committee was not declared illegal until June.
• There were lathi-charges and firing on unarmed crowds, which resulted in several deaths and injuries, and thousands of satyagrahis, in addition to Gandhi and other Congress leaders, were imprisoned.
• Lord Irwin, the viceroy, proposed a round table conference in July 1930 and reiterated the goal of dominion status.
• He also agreed to allow Tej Bahadur Sapru and M.R. Jayakar to investigate the possibility of peace between the Congress and the government.
• Motilal and Jawaharlal Nehru were taken to Yerawada Jail in August 1930 to meet Gandhi and discuss the possibility of a settlement.
• The demands of the Nehrus and Gandhi were unequivocal:
  • the right to secede from Britain;
  • complete national government with control over defence and finance; and
  • an independent tribunal to settle Britain’s financial claims.

Gandhi-Irwin Pact (1931)

• On March 5, 1931, Mahatma Gandhi and Lord Irwin, India’s then-viceroy, signed the Gandhi-Irwin Pact.
• The agreement was signed just before the second round table conference in London began.
• The Gandhi-Irwin Pact, also known as the Delhi Pact, equalised the Congress and the government.
• To lay the groundwork for the Round Table Conference to be held in England, Mahatma Gandhi held fortnight-long talks with Viceroy Lord Irwin, which culminated in the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, signed by Gandhi on behalf of the Congress and Lord Irwin on behalf of the British India government.

Evaluation

• Gandhi’s decision to suspend the civil disobedience movement, as agreed under the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, was not a retreat because:
  • mass movements are inherently short-lived;
  • the capacity of the masses to make sacrifices, unlike activists, is limited;
  • there were signs of exhaustion after September 1930, particularly among shopkeepers and merchants who had participated so enthusiastically.
• Youth were undoubtedly disappointed because they had participated enthusiastically and expected the world to end with a bang rather than a whimper.
• Gujarati peasants were dissatisfied because their lands were not immediately restored (in fact, they were restored only during the province’s Congress ministry’s rule).
• However, many people were overjoyed that the government had been forced to recognise their movement as significant, treat their leader as an equal, and sign a pact with him.
• When political prisoners were released from prison, they were greeted as heroes.

Strategic Debates

• There was a two-stage debate on the nationalists’ future strategy: first, what course the national movement should take in the immediate future, i.e., during the non-mass struggle (1934-35).
• Second, in 1937, over the issue of office acceptance in the context of provincial elections held under the autonomy provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935.

• At this point, two points of view were presented.
  • On Gandhian lines, there should be constructive work. There should be constitutional debate and participation in Central Legislative elections (due in 1934).
  • A strong leftist trend within the Congress, represented by Nehru, was critical of both constructive work and council entry in place of the suspended civil disobedience movement, arguing that this would sidetrack political mass action and divert attention away from the main issue of colonial resistance.
  • Instead, this section advocated for the resumption and continuation of non-constitutionalist mass struggle, arguing that the situation was still revolutionary due to the ongoing economic crisis and the masses’ willingness to fight.

Conclusion

The movement was disbanded in 1934. In 1934, Congress passed an important resolution. It demanded the formation of a constituent assembly, which would be elected by the people using the adult franchise. Only such an assembly, it declared, could draft a constitution for India. As a result, it claimed that only the people had the right to choose the form of government under which they would live. Though the congress failed to achieve its goal, it was successful in mobilising large sections of the population in the country’s second great mass struggle. It had also set forth radical goals for the transformation of Indian society.

On March 5, 1931, Mahatma Gandhi and Lord Irwin, India’s then-viceroy, signed the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. The agreement was signed just before the second round table conference in London began. The Gandhi-Irwin Pact, also known as the Delhi Pact, equalized Congress and the government. To lay the groundwork for the Round Table Conference to be held in England, Mahatma Gandhi held fortnight-long talks with Viceroy Lord Irwin, in the Gandhi-Irwin Pact, signed by Gandhi on behalf of the Congress and Lord Irwin on behalf of the British Indian government.

Background

• The Second Round Table Conference was scheduled to take place in London in 1931.
• The Salt Satyagraha was held in 1930, and India and Gandhi gained international attention.
• The British government in India was chastised for treating Indians unfairly.
• Gandhi and many other leaders, as well as thousands of Indians, were imprisoned.
• Lord Irwin wanted the matter to be resolved.
• Gandhi and all other members of the Congress Working Committee (CWC) were unconditionally released on January 25, 1931, and the CWC authorised Gandhi to initiate discussions with the viceroy.
• Gandhi was authorized to meet with Lord Irwin by Congress President Sardar Vallabhai Patel.

Features

The Gandhi-Irwin Pact’s main features include:

• The Round Table Conference was agreed to by the Indian National Congress (INC).
• The civil disobedience movement would be halted by the INC.
• Withdrawal of all ordinances restricting Congress’s activities.
• Release of those arrested for participating in the civil disobedience movement.
• All political prisoners who have not been convicted of violence should be released immediately.
• Return of confiscated lands that have not yet been sold to third parties.
• Government employees who had resigned would not be treated unfairly.
• The right to produce salt for consumption in coastal villages.
• Picketing must be peaceful and non-aggressive.
• Removal of salt tax.

Significance

• The pact firmly established the Indian National Congress as a party with the support of millions of Indian nationals.
• The pact paved the way for the Government of India Act 1935, which softened the diarchy system and allowed a greater number of Indian representatives to enter the two houses of the center legislature.
• Following the successful softening of the diarchy in 1935, elections in Indian provinces in 1937 transferred power to elected Indian members.

Outcome

• Despite boycotting the first Round Table Conference, members of the CWC attended the second conference in September 1931.
• All ordinances prohibiting peaceful protests were repealed.
• All Civil Disobedience Movement arrestees who were not charged with violence were released and their confiscated property was returned.
• Bans on the INC were lifted, and it was permitted to hold peaceful meetings that were not intended to be anti-establishment.
• Ordinary people were permitted to trade in indigenous salt produced along the Indian sea coasts.
• The government would permit peaceful protests outside liquor stores and other foreign goods stores.
• However, Irwin refused to concede to the demand for a formal investigation into police brutality during the Civil Disobedience Movement and the commutation of Bhagat Singh’s hanging to life imprisonment.

Comparison with Non-Cooperation Movement

There were some differences between the Civil Disobedience Movement and the Non-Cooperation Movement, such as:

• This time, the stated goal was complete independence, not just redressing two specific wrongs and a vaguely worded swaraj.
• The methods involved law violations from the start, not just non-cooperation with foreign rule.
• There was a decrease in protests involving the intelligentsia, such as lawyers quitting their practices and students leaving government schools to attend national schools and colleges.
• Muslim participation was far below that of the Non-Cooperation Movement.
• There was no major labor upsurge that coincided with the movement.
• The large participation of peasants and business groups compensated for the decline of other characteristics.
• This time, the number of people imprisoned was roughly three times higher.
• Congress had a better organizational structure.

Conclusion

Gandhi’s motivations for signing a pact with Viceroy Lord Irwin are best understood in terms of his technique. Satyagraha movements were frequently referred to as “struggles,” “rebellions,” and “wars without violence.” However, due to the common connotation of these words, they appeared to place an undue emphasis on the negative aspects of the movements, namely opposition and conflict. The goal of satyagraha, however, was not to achieve the physical elimination or moral breakdown of an adversary but to initiate psychological processes that would allow minds and hearts to meet through suffering at his hands.

Mahatma Gandhi launched the individual satyagraha movement in 1940 in response to Lord Linlithgow’s August Offer. Gandhi desired a peaceful protest against the August Offer. As a result, instead of mass Satyagraha, he launched individual satyagraha as a nonviolent movement.

Objectives

• To demonstrate that nationalist patience was not the result of weakness.
• To express people’s disinterest in the war and their lack of distinction between Nazism and the double autocracy that ruled India.
• To give the government another chance to accept Congress’ demands peacefully.

Features

• Following the August Offer of 1940, Gandhi declared the Individual Satyagraha.
• This movement began with only three satyagrahis, all of whom were arrested by British police.
• Acharya Vinoba Bhave was the first Individual Satyagrahi, followed by Jawahar Lal Nehru and Brahma Dutt.
• Hundreds of Satyagrahis joined the Individual Satyagraha, many of whom were imprisoned.
• Satyagrahi’s demand was to use the right to free expression to oppose the war by issuing an anti-war declaration.
• The Satyagrahis also launched the Delhi Chalo Movement in the later stages of the movement. This movement, however, failed and was abandoned by December 1940.
• Because the British needed India’s participation in the war, the August Offer proposals were reconsidered.
• Following that, in March 1942, the British government launched the Cripps Mission.

Leaders Involved

Vinoba Bhave

• He was the first person chosen to present an individual satyagraha.
• On October 17, 1940, he launched his mission from Paunar, just five miles from Wardha.
• In a speech, he asked the people not to participate in the Government’s war effort for three reasons:
  • the Government’s refusal to establish a Provisional National Government;
  • dragging India into the war without her consent or consultation; and
  • denial of freedom to preach against the war.

Jawaharlal Nehru

• He was selected as the second Satyagrahi after Vinoba Bhave.
• On October 31, 1940, the government detained Nehru at the Cheoki train station near Allahabad for violating the Defence of India Rules, preventing him from launching his campaign.
• He was sentenced to four and a half years in prison for his seditious remarks.
• His arrest stunned the country. Protests were held all over the country.
• Even the British government was concerned, and Churchill sent an urgent cable requesting that Nehru be treated with special consideration and care.

Brahma Dutt

• He was the third person chosen to offer an individual satyagraha.
• He was an inmate of Gandhiji’s ashram.

Impact

• It allowed the British government to accept Indian requests peacefully while also expressing the Indian people’s strong political feelings.
• Due to their anti-Nazi sentiments, Gandhiji and the Congress were hesitant to exploit Britain’s predicament and humiliate her war effort by inciting a widespread revolt in India.
• Before Gandhiji called a halt to the individual satyagraha campaign for the Christmas holiday, 29 ex-ministers, 11 members of the Working Committee, 176 members of the All-India Congress Committee, and 400 members of the Central and Provincial Assemblies had been arrested.
• Maulana Azad and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were prominent among them.
• On January 5, 1941, the campaign resumed. It quickly gained traction, and by the end of January, the total number of voluntary arrests had surpassed 2,250.
• The enthusiasm of the volunteers offering themselves up for arrest was incredible. Within a few months, over 20,000 people had been convicted.
• When the satyagrahis were released from prison, they offered themselves up for re-arrest.
• Thousands were thus constantly imprisoned, sacrificing all of their comforts.
• The government released all the satyagrahis in early December 1941.

Challenges

• Individual Satyagraha encountered challenges and limitations in achieving their objectives.
• Many of those chosen to offer Satyagraha were hesitant to resign from municipal positions, resulting in slow progress.
• Furthermore, the movement’s potential impact was hampered by the limited nature of participation and Mahatma Gandhi’s restrictions.

Outcome

• In December 1941, Mahatma Gandhi called off the Individual Satyagraha.
• While the movement did not produce immediate tangible results, it did play an important role in fostering Indian nationalism.
• By the time the Individual Satyagraha ended, the war had taken a new turn.
• The British were on the verge of defeat, and Japanese forces had taken control of Southeast Asia.
• The arrival of the Cripps Mission in India occurred as the British government sought a political solution to the growing demands for independence.

Conclusion

Individual Satyagraha, through its principles of nonviolence, self-sacrifice, and unwavering commitment to truth, exemplified the essence of India’s struggle for independence. The campaign’s impact transcended its duration, leaving behind a legacy that continues to resonate in the hearts and minds of those who aspire for justice, freedom, and equality.

The Quit India Movement, also known as the August Movement or August Kranti, was a rallying call issued by Mahatma Gandhi from the Bombay session of the All-India Congress Committee in Mumbai on August 8, 1942. It was a part of Mahatma Gandhi’s Civil Disobedience Movement, which aimed to end British rule in India.

Background

• Following Cripps’ departure, Gandhi drafted a resolution calling for British withdrawal and a nonviolent non-cooperation movement in the event of a Japanese invasion.
• The idea of a struggle was accepted at the CWC meeting in Wardha on July 14, 1942.
• The Congress Working Committee met in Wardha in July 1942 and decided to give Gandhi command of the nonviolent mass movement.
• The resolution is commonly known as the ‘Quit India’ resolution.
• It was to be approved by the All India Congress Committee meeting in Bombay in August, as proposed by Jawaharlal Nehru and seconded by Sardar Patel.
• Mahatma Gandhi began the Quit India movement at Gowalia Tank Maidan in Mumbai, popularly known as August Kranti Maidan.
• The slogans of the movement were “Quit India” and “Bharat Chodo.” Gandhi gave the people the mantra, “Do or die.”
• It was supposed to be a peaceful, nonviolent movement to persuade the British to grant India independence, according to the Congress doctrine.

Resolution

On August 8, 1942, the Congress meeting in Gowalia Tank, Bombay, ratified the Quit India Resolution. The meeting also agreed:

• To demand that British rule in India be ended immediately;
• Declare free India’s commitment to defend itself against all forms of Fascism and imperialism;
• Form a provisional Government of India following British withdrawal; and
• Sanction a civil disobedience movement against British rule.

Instructions of Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhi gave a set of instructions to diverse groups of people. They were as follows:

• Government employees – Instead of resigning, pledge your allegiance to the INC.
• Soldiers – Stay with the army but don’t fire on your comrades.
• Landlords/ Zamindars – If the landlords/Zamindars are anti-government, pay the agreed-upon rent; if they are pro-government, do not pay the rent.
• Students – If they are confident enough, they can leave their studies.
• Princes – You must stand behind the people and embrace their sovereignty.
• People of princely states – Only support the monarch if he is anti-government; declare yourselves as Indian citizens.

Reasons for Quit India Movement

• The Second World Conflict had begun in 1939, and Japan, as one of the Axis Powers opposing the British in the war, was gaining ground on India’s north-eastern frontiers.
• The British had abandoned their colonies in Southeast Asia, leaving its people to fend for themselves. The Indian public, who had misgivings about the British ability to defend India from Axis assault, was not impressed by this move.
• Gandhi also stated that if the British were to leave India, Japan would have no cause to invade the country.
• Hearing about British military defeats, and wartime hardships such as high prices for key necessities fueled animosity of the British government.
• The INC called for a major civil disobedience movement when the Cripps Mission failed to provide any type of constitutional solution to India’s challenges.

Phases of Quit India Movement

The Quit India Movement can be studied in three phases.

The First Phase (Rampage by Public)

• The general public attacked authority symbols and forcibly hoisted national flags on public buildings.
• Satyagrahis surrendered to arrest, bridges were blown up, railway tracks were removed, and telegraph lines were severed.
• This type of activity was most prevalent in the eastern United Provinces and in Bihar.
• Students reacted by striking in schools and colleges, marching in processions, writing and distributing illegal news sheets (Patrika), and acting as couriers for underground networks.
• Ahmedabad, Bombay, Jamshedpur, Ahmednagar, and Poona workers went on strike.

The Second Phase (Underground Activities)

• Many nationalists fled to the underground and engaged in subversive activities.
• Socialists, Forward Bloc members, Gandhi ashramites, revolutionary nationalists, and local organizations from Bombay, Poona, Satara, Baroda, and other parts of Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, United Provinces, Bihar, and Delhi took part in these activities.
• Rammanohar Lohia, Jayaprakash Narayan, Aruna Asaf Ali, Usha Mehta, Biju Patnaik, Chhotubhai Puranik, Achyut Patwardhan, Sucheta Kripalani, and R.P. Goenka were among the key figures involved in underground activity.
• Usha Mehta founded an underground radio station in Bombay.
• This phase of underground activity was intended to maintain popular morale by maintaining a line of command and guidance for the distribution of arms and ammunition.

The Third Phase (Parallel Governments)

Parallel governments were established in many places, including

• Ballia (for a week in August 1942) under Chittu Pandey. Many members of Congress were released as a result of his efforts.
• Tamluk (Midnapore, from December 1942 to September 1944) – Jatiya Sarkar worked on cyclone relief, sanctioned school grants, distributed paddy from the rich to the poor, organized Vidyut Vahinis, and so on.
• Satara (mid-1943 to 1945) – dubbed “Prati Sarkar,” it was organized by leaders such as Y.B. Chavan, Nana Patil, and others. Village libraries and Nyayadan Mandals were established, as were prohibition campaigns and ‘Gandhi marriages.’
• Businessmen (through donations, shelter, and material assistance), students (as couriers), simple villagers (by refusing to provide information to authority), pilots and train drivers (by delivering bombs and other material), and government officials, including police, all provided active assistance (who passed on secret information to the activists).

Impact of the Quit India Movement

• Following Gandhi’s demand, the British administration arrested all prominent Congress leaders the next day. Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, and others were detained.
• As a result, newer leaders like Jayaprakash Narayan and Ram Manohar Lohia took over the movement.
• Aruna Asaf Ali, for example, emerged from the leadership vacuum.
• This movement resulted in the detention of almost 100,000 people. To put an end to the unrest, the authorities used violence. Mass floggings and lathi charges were used.
• Women and children were not exempt from the massacre. In total, about ten thousand persons were killed by police shootings.
• The INC was declared illegal. Its leaders were imprisoned for virtually the whole war. Gandhi was released in 1944 because of ill health.
• The people reacted strongly to Gandhi’s demand. However, there were isolated incidents of violence and damage to government property due to the lack of leadership. Many structures were set ablaze, power lines were cut, and communication and transportation links were disrupted.
• Some parties were opposed to the movement. The Muslim League, the Communist Party of India, and the Hindu Mahasabha were all against it.
• The League opposed the British leaving India without first splitting the nation. In reality, Jinnah urged more Muslims to join the army.
• Because the British were associated with the Soviet Union, the Communist Party supported the British war effort.
• From outside the nation, Subhas Chandra Bose was organizing the Indian National Army and the Azad Hind government.
• C Rajagopalachari, a member of the INC, resigned because he did not support complete independence.
• The Indian bureaucracy, in general, as opposed to the Quit India Movement.
• Strikes and demonstrations took place across the country. Despite the absence of support from the communists, workers supported the movement by refusing to work in the factories.
• The movement’s main focus areas were Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Midnapore, and Karnataka. The uprising continued until 1944.

Significance of Quit India Movement

• The campaign continued without the command of Mahatma Gandhi or any other leader, who were all imprisoned when it began.
• People from all walks of life turned out in large numbers.
• Students, workers, and peasants were the movement’s backbone, while the upper classes and bureaucracy remained mostly loyal.
• Loyalty to the government has deteriorated significantly.
• This also demonstrated the depths to which nationalism had progressed.
• The movement established the fact that it was no longer possible to rule India without the consent of the Indian people.
• Although a certain degree of the popular initiative had been sanctioned by the leadership itself, subject to the limitations of the instructions, the element of spontaneity was higher than before.
• Furthermore, Congress had spent a long time ideologically, politically, and organizationally prepared for the struggle.
• Following the uprising among the masses, the British began to seriously consider the topic of Indian independence.
• In the 1940s, it changed the nature of political negotiations with the British empire, paving the path for India’s independence.
• The movement was significant in that it put the demand for independence on the immediate agenda of the national movement. There could be no India after Quit India.

Conclusion

The Quit India Movement was a watershed moment in the sense that it established the stage for future Indian politics. The freedom struggle was owned by ‘We the People’ who fought for India’s independence in the Quit India Movement. Throughout this conflict, ordinary people demonstrated unrivaled heroism and militancy. The repression they faced was the harshest, and the circumstances under which they offered resistance were the most adverse.