Politics of Separatism, Communalism and the Politics of Partition- 2 | History Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Decline of the Nationalist Trend Among Muslims:

• Growth of Congress Membership: Badruddin Tyabji's presidency of the Congress session in 1887 and the increasing number of Muslim delegates in subsequent years indicated a growing Muslim presence in the Congress.
• Non-Communal Nature of Congress Demands: Muslim leaders pointed out that Congress demands were not communal or exclusive to Hindus, which helped in attracting more Muslims to the Congress.
• Continued Nationalist Trend: The nationalist trend among Muslims persisted across the country until the late 19th century, showing a strong inclination towards nationalism rather than communalism.
• Support for Swadeshi Agitation: Bengali Muslim intellectuals, including Abdul Rasul, actively supported the Swadeshi agitation against the partition of Bengal, reflecting the dominant nationalist sentiment among Muslims in Bengal until the late 1920s.

Formation of the All India Muslim League:

• The Swadeshi Movement had a significant impact on Indian politics by involving a large section of the Muslim intelligentsia in the Congress party.
• In response to this and other factors, the British Government felt pressured to make some constitutional concessions, marking a shift away from political passivity.
• In December 1907, the All India Muslim League was established by prominent Muslim figures such as the Aga Khan, the Nawab of Dacca, and Nawab Mohsin-ul-Mulk. This group included big zamindars, former bureaucrats, and other upper-class Muslims.
• The League was founded as a loyalist , communal , and conservative political organization. It supported the partition of Bengal and advocated for separate Muslim interests, including separate electorates and safeguards for Muslims in government services.
• One of the League's main goals was to prevent the emerging Muslim intelligentsia from aligning with the Congress party.
• The League's activities were primarily directed against the National Congress and Hindus , rather than the colonial regime.

Growth of Hindu Communalism:

• In the 1870s, a group of Hindu zamindars, moneylenders, and middle-class professionals started to promote anti-Muslim sentiments.
• They accepted the colonial view of Indian history, portraying Muslim rule as tyrannical and British rule as liberating for Hindus.
• In U.P. and Bihar , they linked the Hindi-Urdu debate to communal identity, claiming Urdu was for Muslims and Hindi for Hindus.
• Nationwide, anti-cow slaughter campaigns in the early 1890s targeted Muslims, despite British cantonments being exempt from such restrictions.
• These agitations often escalated into communal riots.
• The Hindu communalists also advocated for a ‘Hindu’ share of seats in legislatures and government services.
• The Punjab Hindu Sabha was established in 1909, with leaders like U.N. Mukherji and Lal Chand shaping Hindu communal ideology.
• They criticized the National Congress for attempting to unify Indians and accused it of sacrificing Hindu interests to appease Muslims.
• Lal Chand, in his booklet Self-Abnegation in Politics , described the Congress as a ‘self-inflicted misfortune’ for Hindus, urging them to abandon the Congress and prioritize Hindu identity.

The All-India Hindu Mahasabha:

• The All-India Hindu Mahasabha held its first session in April 1915, chaired by the Maharaja of Kasim Bazar.
• However, for many years, it was a weak organization compared to the Muslim League due to several reasons.
• Social Dynamics: Among Muslims, the zamindars, aristocrats, and ex-bureaucrats played a dominant role, even within the middle class. In contrast, the Hindu and Parsi communities saw the rise of the modern intelligentsia, who emphasized science, democracy, and nationalism, gaining social and political influence.
• Influence of Landlords and Mullahs: Landlords and traditional religious leaders, whether Hindu or Muslim, were conservative and supported colonial authority. However, Hindu landlords were losing their leadership positions, while Muslim landlords and mullahs continued to dominate.
• Middle Class and Communalism: The weak position of the middle class among Muslims and its social and ideological backwardness contributed to the growth of Muslim communalism.
• Colonial Government's Stance: The colonial government offered few concessions and little support to Hindu communalism, preferring to bank on Muslim communalism and finding it challenging to placate both at the same time.

The colonial authorities and communalists introduced separate electorates in the Morley-Minto Reforms of 1907, which significantly spread and consolidated communalism. This system created separate constituencies for Muslim voters, and later for Sikhs and others, where only candidates of the same religion could stand, and only voters of that religion could vote.

• Separate electorates turned elections and legislative councils into platforms for communal conflicts. Since voters were exclusively from one religion, candidates could make overtly communal appeals, leading to a gradual shift in public thinking towards communal identities and grievances.

• The system of reservation of seats and weightage in legislatures, government services, and educational institutions had similar divisive effects, fostering a communal mindset in socio-economic grievances.

• Communalists often justified their own communalism by claiming they were reacting to the communalism of others, creating a cycle of blame and justification among Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh communalists.

• The rise of communalism was not a linear process but a complex interplay where different variants of communalism nourished each other.

• Young Muslim intellectuals became disillusioned with the loyalist and anti-Hindu stance of the upper-class leadership of the Muslim League and began gravitating towards modern and radical nationalist ideas.

• The Ahrar movement emerged during this period, led by figures like Maulana Mohammed Ali , Hakim Ajmal Khan , and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad , who advocated for militant nationalism and rationalist ideas.

• By 1912, the Muslim League began to adopt self-government as an objective, with the Aga Khan stepping down as President, and M.A. Jinnah joining the League, steering it towards self-government and aligning it more closely with Congress policies.

• From 1912 to 1924, young nationalists started to dominate the League, moving it closer to Congress policies, although their nationalism retained a strong religious and pan-Islamic aspect.

• This religious dimension initially did not conflict with nationalism but later proved detrimental by fostering a habit of viewing political issues through a religious lens, appealing to sentiments related to the Caliphate and holy places rather than addressing the broader implications of modern imperialism.

Lucknow Pact (1916)

• The Congress and the Muslim League, under the influence of leaders like Lokmanya Tilak and M.A. Jinnah , achieved significant political unity.
• In December 1916, both organizations met in Lucknow , where they signed the Lucknow Pact and presented common demands to the British government, including the demand for self-government for India post-World War I.
• The Pact endorsed separate electorates and the system of weightage and reservation of seats for minorities in legislative bodies.
• While the Pact was a progressive step, it also had drawbacks:
• By accepting separate electorates, the Congress acknowledged communal politics and the idea that India was made up of distinct communities with separate interests. This laid the groundwork for the future rise of communalism in Indian politics.
• Post-World War I Nationalist Movement
• The period following World War I saw a surge in the nationalist movement and Hindu-Muslim unity, particularly during the agitations against the Rowlatt Acts , and the Khilafat and Non-Cooperation Movements .
• Despite the Khilafat being a religious issue, it heightened the national and anti-imperialist awareness among the Muslim masses and middle classes. The nationalist movement’s engagement with the Khilafat issue was akin to other movements like the Akali Movement and the anti-untouchability campaign, which focused on specific communities.
• However, there were weaknesses as well. The nationalist leadership struggled to elevate the religious political consciousness of Muslims to a secular political perspective. For instance, the Khilafat leaders relied on religious appeals and fatwas, reinforcing the influence of orthodoxy and priesthood and fostering a habit of viewing political matters through a religious lens. This approach, while galvanizing support, inadvertently left room for the emergence of communal ideology and politics in the future.

Withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement and Rise of Communalism:

• The Non-Cooperation Movement was called off in February 1922.
• Disillusionment and frustration among the people, along with the implementation of Dyarchy, led to a surge in communalism.
• Post-1922, India experienced a series of communal riots.

Revival of Communal Organizations:

• Old communal organizations were revived, and new ones were established.
• The Muslim League became active again, purging radical and nationalist elements.
• Upper-class leaders with loyalist and communal ideologies resurfaced.

Hindu Communalism and the Hindu Mahasabha:

• The Hindu Mahasabha was revived in 1923, promoting anti-Muslim sentiments.
• Its aim was to protect and promote Hindu culture and civilization, advocating for Hindu Rashtra.
• Both Hindu and Muslim communalists fostered a sense of fear among their communities, emphasizing threats of dominance and extermination.

Sangathan and Shuddhi Movements:

• During this period, the Sangathan and Shuddhi movements among Hindus emerged, focusing on communal consolidation and religious conversion.
• Similarly, the Tanzeem and Tabligh movements among Muslims aimed at communal consolidation and religious outreach.

Shift of Nationalists and Rise of Communal Pressure:

• Nationalists faced backlash and were labeled as apostates and enemies of their religions.
• Many nationalists succumbed to communal pressure, adopting communal or semi-communal stances.
• The Swarajists were divided by communalism, with some offering cooperation to the government for Hindu interests.
• Prominent figures like Lajpat Rai, Madan Mohan Malaviya, and N.C. Kelkar joined the Hindu Mahasabha, advocating for Hindu communal solidarity.

Criticism of Secular Congress:

• The Hindu Mahasabha and its allies launched campaigns against secular Congress members.
• They accused figures like Motilal Nehru of being anti-Hindu and favoring Muslims.
• Some former Khilafatists, including Maulanas Mohammed Ali and Shaukat Ali, turned communal, accusing the Congress of promoting Hindu dominance.

Increase in Communal Riots:

• The peak of communalism was marked by riots in major North Indian cities during 1923-24.
• The Simon Commission Report noted 112 major communal riots between 1922 and 1927.

Nationalist Leadership's Response:

• The nationalist leadership struggled to counter communal political forces effectively.
• Their strategy involved seeking unity with communal leaders through negotiations.
• This included acting as mediators between communal groups and negotiating with Muslim communal leaders on minority interests.

Delhi Proposals and Communal Representation:

• In 1928, Indian political leaders organized conferences to address communal issues in response to the Simon Commission.
• Muslim communal leaders presented the Delhi Proposals, which included:
  • Making Sind a separate province;
  • Equating the North-West Frontier Province with other provinces;
  • Ensuring 33 1/3 percent Muslim representation in the central legislature;
  • Adjusting representation in Punjab and Bengal to ensure a Muslim majority and maintaining existing seat reservations in other provinces.

Jinnah's Fourteen Points:

• The Nehru Report, drafted by an all-party committee, proposed significant changes for India, including federalism based on linguistic provinces, joint electorates, and the separation of Sind from Bombay.
• The Report faced opposition at an All-Party Convention in Calcutta, with disagreements particularly among Muslim communalists and other groups.
• Jinnah initially sought amendments to the Report, aiming to protect Muslim interests, including the demand for residuary powers to be held by provinces.
• When his amendments were rejected, Jinnah consolidated various communal demands into the Fourteen Points , which included the Delhi Proposals, Calcutta amendments, and calls for separate electorates and seat reservations for Muslims.

The Fourteen Points became a foundation for future communal politics.

• The Congress's strategy of negotiating with communal leaders was flawed, as it legitimized their representation of communal interests and weakened the Congress's position against communalism.
• Constant negotiations with Muslim communal leaders undermined secular Muslim leaders within the Congress and made it difficult to oppose Hindu communal figures.
• The Congress struggled to balance concessions to both Hindu and Muslim communalism, leading to a strengthening of Muslim communalists and potential Hindu backlash.
• Even if a compromise had been reached, it would likely have been temporary due to the lack of authority of communal leaders to enforce lasting agreements.
• Concessions to communalists only fueled their demands, creating a cycle of increasing and more extreme communal expectations.

1928-29: Communal Politics and Jinnah:

• During this period, communal ideology was strong, making it hard to appease communal leaders for long.
• The situation required total opposition to communalism in all areas: ideological, cultural, social, and political.
• There was a need for a political-ideological struggle against communalism, understanding its roots and social base.
• The peasants’ cause needed to be addressed, as their class struggle was being diverted into communal channels.
• Despite the commitment to secularism by leaders like Dadabhai Naoroji, Gandhiji, and Nehru , this comprehensive approach was lacking.
• The debate with communalists should have been directed into rational and analytical channels, forcing them to argue on the basis of reason and science.
• Gandhiji and the Congress did promote Hindu-Muslim unity and resisted Hindu communalists at times, but they did not provide a deep analysis of communalism.

1920s: Communalism's Limited Reach:

• During this time, communalism was not widespread in Indian society.
• Communal riots were mostly limited to cities and were not very numerous considering the country's size.
• Hindu communalists had little mass support, and the social base of Muslim communalists was also narrow.
• Nationalist Muslims within the Congress were still a significant political force.
• Rising movements like trade unions, peasants, and youth were entirely secular.
• The reaction to the Simon Commission highlighted the weakness of communal forces, as the Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha were divided in their responses.
• The anti-Simon Commission protests and the Second Civil Disobedience Movement (1930-1934) revitalized the national movement, pushing communalists into the background.

Early 1930s: Round Table Conferences:

• Communal leaders gained visibility during these conferences, aligning with reactionary British elements.
• Both Muslim and Hindu communalists sought British support for their communal interests.
• Notable figures like the Aga Khan and Bhai Parmanand advocated for Hindu-Muslim division and cooperation with the British government.

1937: Strength of Communal Parties:

• Communal parties remained weak and narrowly based until 1937.
• Many young Muslim and Hindu intellectuals, workers, and peasants joined nationalist and socialist movements in the early 1930s.

1932: The Communal Award:

• To strengthen Muslim communalism, the British Government announced the Communal Award , which accepted most Muslim communal demands.
• This included the Delhi Proposals of 1927 and Jinnah’s Fourteen Points of 1929.
• The communal forces were faced with a new situation, unable to continue as before, and had to find a new direction.

Communalism in India

• Second Stage (Liberal): Until 1937, communalism was at a liberal stage where it acknowledged distinct religion-based communities in India with their own interests, but still aimed for eventual national unity. 
• The liberal communalist believed in the need for separate communal rights and safeguards for different communities, but within the framework of a single Indian nation. 
• This perspective recognized the common interests of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and Christians, and aimed for their merger into a single nation . 
• However, liberal communalism had a narrow social base , primarily supported by the upper and middle classes. 
• After 1937, communalism began to take on a more virulent and extremist form. 

Extreme Communalism after 1937:

• Extreme communalism was rooted in hatred, fear, and irrationality . 
• It emphasized domination and suppression , portraying Hindus and Muslims as in permanent conflict . 
• The propaganda used extreme language like oppression, extermination, and domination . 
• Lies about the National Congress and Gandhiji were spread, attacking even their co-religionists. 
• Popular Base : After 1937, communalism gained a popular base and started mobilizing mass opinion, especially among the urban lower middle classes. 
• It transformed from liberal communalism to extremist communalism due to the rise of the Congress and the Civil Disobedience Movement . 
• The radicalization of the national movement pushed landlords to seek communalism for class defense. 
• In regions like Punjab and Bengal , landlords switched support to the Muslim League or Hindu communal parties for protection against Congress radicalism. 
• Colonial authorities also found communalism to be the only viable political tool for their divide and rule policy after 1937. 
• Non-Brahmin Challenge: The challenge posed by Non-Brahmin groups in Maharashtra and South India had diminished. 
• Scheduled Castes and Backward Castes: These groups could no longer be mobilized against the Congress party, except in isolated areas. 
• Congress Unity: Both the Right and Left wings of the Congress party refused to split, maintaining unity. 
• Inter-Provincial Rivalries: Conflicts between different provinces and languages had been resolved earlier when the Congress accepted the idea of linguistic states and the cultural diversity of India. 
• Zamindars and Landlords: Attempts to pit zamindars and landlords against the national movement had failed. The 1937 elections showed that major social and political groups under colonialism were weakened. 
• Communal Strategy: The colonial rulers decided to exploit communal divisions, supporting Muslim communalism despite their concerns about leaders like M.A. Jinnah, who was independent and critical of colonial rule. 
• World War II Impact: The outbreak of World War II on September 1, 1939, reinforced the reliance on communal divisions. 
• Congress Actions: The Congress withdrew its ministries and demanded a declaration of complete freedom for India after the war. 
• Muslim League Role: The Muslim League was positioned as a counter to nationalist demands, recognized as the sole spokesperson for Muslims, and given veto power over political settlements. 
• Unity Narrative: The colonial narrative suggested that India could not gain freedom until Hindus and Muslims united, a unity made impossible by official support for Muslim communalism. 
• Hindu Mahasabha and Other Groups: These groups also offered support to the colonial government during the war, but the colonial authorities remained committed to Muslim communalism. 
• Election Campaigns of 1937: The Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha had campaigned on liberal communal lines in the 1937 elections, incorporating aspects of the nationalist programme, but performed poorly. 
• Shift to Militant Politics: Realizing their decline, both the Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha shifted to more militant, mass-based politics to survive. 
• Previously, organized mass movements and cadre-based politics were led by radical nationalists who opposed the status quo.
• Conservatives, on the other hand, avoided mass movements.
• In the 1930s, the fascist movement presented a successful right-wing model of mass politics that did not alarm vested interests.
• Both Hindu and Muslim communalists decided to adopt this model.
• The Congress party had not yet established strong roots among all sections of the masses, particularly among Muslims.
• This was seen as an opportunity to exploit their political immaturity before it was too late.
• The need to shift towards extreme Muslim communalism became urgent when the Congress, under Jawaharlal Nehru, launched the Muslim Mass Contact Programme.
• The Congress had gone far in accepting Muslim communal demands in the late 1920s.
• The Communal Award in 1932 and the Government of India Act in 1935 accepted most liberal communal demands.
• The National Congress did not oppose these concessions.
• However, these concessions lacked a strong guarantee once foreign rulers left and the country was ruled democratically.
• The communalists needed to find new demands since their previous ones had been met.
• Until 1937, the Congress allowed both Hindu and Muslim liberal communalists to operate within its organization.
• Under pressure from Jawaharlal Nehru and the Left, the Congress began to attack communalists.
• The Congress refused to accommodate them in the elections of 1934 and 1937.
• The Congress eventually expelled these communalists in 1938.
• Facing political extinction, Hindu communalists had to find a new basis and program for their survival and growth. 

Was it a failure of Congress?

• It is not accurate to say that Congress failed in dealing with communalism in 1947 when it accepted the partition of the country. At that time, there may have been no viable alternative. 
• Communalism had already become deeply entrenched, and partition might have been the only feasible solution to avoid a civil war, especially with foreign rulers controlling the armed forces and police, who were themselves prepared to join the conflict. 
• Historical situations do not always have immediate solutions, and such was the case in 1947 . 
•  Socio-political issues like communalism do not have instant remedies; they require the preparation of conditions and forces over many years, even decades. This is where Congress and the national movement fell short. 
• Despite their commitment to secularism and efforts like Gandhiji's promotion of Hindu-Muslim unity and Nehru's analysis of communalism's socio-economic roots, Indian nationalists failed to conduct a widespread ideological-political struggle against communalism. 
• Congress relied too much on negotiations with communal leaders and did not develop a effective long-term strategy to combat communalism at political, ideological, and cultural levels. This is a point where Congress and its leadership can be criticized.