by Mahatma Gandhi
I. Foreign Soldiers in India
| “Whatever the consequences to India, her real safety and Britain’s, too, lie in orderly and timely British withdrawal from India. All talk of treaties with the Princes and obligations towards minorities are a British creation designed for the preservation of British rule and British interests. It must melt before the stern reality that faces all of us.” |
Among the multitude of questions contained in my correspondence is the one referring to the advent of foreign soldiers in India. We have foreign prisoners enough. Now we have promise of a never-ending stream of soldiers from America and possibly China. I must confess that I do not look upon this event with equanimity. Cannot a limitless number of soldiers be trained out of India’s millions? Would they not make as good fighting material as any in the world? Then, why foreigners? We know what American aid means. It amounts in the end to American influence, if not American rule added to British. It is a tremendous price to pay for the possible success of Allied arms. I see no Indian freedom peeping through all this preparation for the so-called defense of India. It is a preparation, pure and simple, for the defense of the British Empire, whatever may be asserted to the contrary. If the British left India to her fate, as they had to leave Singapore, non-violent India would not lose anything. Probably the Japanese would leave India alone. Perhaps India, if the main parties composed their differences as they probably would, would be able effectively to help China in the way of peace and in the long run may even play a decisive part in the promotion of world peace. But all these happy things may not happen, if the British will leave India only when they must. How much more creditable, how much braver it would be for Britain to offer battle in the West and leave the East to adjust her own position! There is no guarantee that she will be able to protect, {12} during this war, all her vast possessions. They have become a dead-weight round her. If she wisely loosens herself from this weight, and the Nazis, the Fascists or the Japanese, instead of leaving India alone, choose to subjugate her, they will find that they have to hold more than they can in their iron hoop. They will find it much more difficult than Britain has. Their very rigidity will strangle them. The British system had an elasticity which served so long as it had no powerful rivals. British elasticity is of no help today. I have said more than once in these columns that the Nazi Power had risen as a nemesis to punish Britain for her sins of exploitation and enslavement of the Asiatic and African races.
Whatever the consequences, therefore, to India, her real safety and Britain’s, too, lie in orderly and timely British withdrawal from India. All talk of treaties with the Princes and obligations towards minorities are a British creation designed for the preservation of British rule and British interests. It must melt before the stern reality that faces all of us. Princes, in so far as they rely upon their armed strength, are more than able to defend themselves against unarmed India. The fiction of majority and minority will vanish like the mist before the morning sun of liberty. Truth to tell, there will be neither majority nor minority in the absence of the paralyzing British arms. The millions of India would, then, be an undefined but one mass of humanity. I have no doubt that at that time the natural leaders will have wisdom enough to evolve an honorable solution of their difficulties. This presupposes Japan and other powers leaving India alone. If they do not, I should hope even then for wisdom to guide the principal parties to devise a scheme whereby they can act with one mind to face the new menace.
Holding the views I do, it is clear why I look upon introduction of foreign soldiers as a positive danger, thoroughly to be deplored and distrusted. The present state of things and the attempt to uphold it are a distinct sign of corroding consumption of the body politic in India.
II. Are You Not Inviting the Japanese?
| “If the British wisely decided to withdraw and leave India to manage her own affairs in the best way she could, the Japanese would be bound to reconsider their plans. The very novelty of the British stroke will confound the Japanese....” |
Q. It is all very well for you to invite bravery, but are you not inviting the Japanese to attack India by asking the British rulers to withdraw?
A. I am not. I feel convinced that the British presence is the incentive for the Japanese attack. If the British wisely decided to withdraw and leave India to manage her own affairs in the best way she could, the Japanese would be bound to reconsider their plans. The very novelty of the British stroke will confound the Japanese, dissolve the subdued hatred against the British, and the atmosphere will be set up for the ending of an unnatural state of things that has dominated and choked Indian life. As far as I can see, the Japanese seem to have made their plans independently of Indian opinion. They are not to be affected by any writing of mine. But they will be confounded by the action I have advised.
III. One Thing Needful
| “The presence of the British in India is an invitation to Japan to invade India. Their withdrawal removes the bait. Assume, however, that it does not; free India will be better able to cope with the invasion. Unadulterated non-cooperation will then have full sway.” |
“To those of us who love India and Indians and have tried to serve her people faithfully, the fact that in our hour of distress the hatred against us is growing is a matter of infinite sorrow. I admit we have not played and are still not playing fair by India; but can two {14} wrongs make a right? When even the ‘enemy’ is in dire distress, should he not be given some quarter? In asking us to withdraw, are you not inviting your own people to bend the knee to Japan, knowing full well that you have not the non-violent strength as a country to resist any foreign aggression or domination? If you had had it, we could never have kept our hold on you. Will you not forgive past sins and rely on the good-will of the new generation of Englishmen and women who can no longer think in terms of Empire? Barring you, among the Congress leaders, is there anyone who believes whole-heartedly in non-violence? Yours is the only logical position, and you alone are a real friend of Britain.”
This is an epitome
of a pathetic English letter. I can but repeat what I felt and said in
my letter to Lord Linlithgow recording my impressions of the first interview
with him after the declaration of war. I have nothing to withdraw, nothing
to repent of. I remain the same friend today of the British that I was
then. I have not a trace of hatred in me towards them. But I have never
been blind to their limitations as I have not been to their great virtues.
I do not deny
the existence of hatred among the people at large, nor its increase with
the march of events. But I claim that my national prescription has kept
it under subjection and even sterilized it to an extent.
I am convinced,
therefore, that the time has come during the war, not after it, for the
British and the Indians to be reconciled to complete separation from each
other. That way and that way alone lies the safety of both and, shall I
say the world. I see with the naked eye that the estrangement is growing.
Every act of the British Government is being interpreted, and I think rightly,
as being in its own interest and for its own safety. There is no such thing
as joint common interest. To take the extreme case, a British victory over
the Japanese will not mean a victory for India. But that is not a near
event. Meanwhile, the introduction of foreign soldiers, the admitted inequalities
of treatment of Indian and European evacuees, and the manifestly overbearing
behavior of the troops are adding to the distrust of British intentions
and declarations. I feel that they cannot all of a sudden change their
traditional nature. Racial superiority is treated not as a vice but a virtue.
This is true not only in India; it is equally true in Africa, {15} it is
true in Burma and Ceylon. Those countries could not be held otherwise than
by assertion of race superiority.
This is a drastic
disease requiring a drastic remedy. I have pointed the remedy – complete
and immediate orderly withdrawal of the British from India at least, in
reality and properly from all non-European possessions. It will be the
bravest and the cleanest act of the British people. It will at once put
the Allied cause on a completely moral basis and may even lead to a most
honorable peace between the warring nations. And the clean end of Imperialism
is likely to be the end of Fascism and Nazism. The suggested action will
certainly blunt the edge of Fascism and Nazism which are an offshoot of
Imperialism.
British distress
cannot be relieved by nationalist India’s aid in the manner suggested by
the writer. It is ill-equipped for the purpose, even if it can be made
enthusiastic about it. And what is there to enthuse nationalistic India?
Just as a person cannot feel the glow of the sun’s heat in its absence,
even so India cannot feel the glow of freedom without the actual experience
of it. Many of us simply cannot contemplate an utterly free India with
calmness and equanimity. The first experience is likely to be a shock before
the glow comes. That shock is a necessity. India is a mighty nation. No
one can tell how she will act and with what effect when the shock is delivered.
I feel, therefore,
that I must devote the whole of my energy to the realization of the supreme
act. The writer of the letter admits the wrong done to India by the British.
I suggest to the writer that the first condition of British success is
the present undoing of the wrong. It should precede, not follow, victory.
The presence of the British in India is an invitation to Japan to invade
India. Their withdrawal removes the bait. Assume, however, that it does
not, free India will be better able to cope with the invasion. Unadulterated
non-cooperation will, then, have full sway.
IV. To Every Briton
| “I ask every Briton to support me in my appeal to the British at this very hour to retire from every Asiatic and African possession, and, at least, from India. That step is essential for the safety of the world and for the destruction of Nazism and Fascism. In this I include Japan’s ‘ism’ also.” |
When I had just begun my public career in South Africa, I wrote An Open Letter to Every Briton in South Africa. It had its effect. I feel that I should repeat the example at this critical juncture in the history of the world. This time my appeal must be to every Briton in the World. He may be nobody in the counsels of his nation. But in the empire of non-violence every true thought counts, every true voice has its full value. Vox populi vox dei is not a copy-book maxim. It is an expression of the solid experience of mankind. But it has one qualification. Its truth is confined to the field of non-violence. Violence can, for the moment, completely frustrate a people’s voice. But since I work in the field of non-violence only, every true thought expressed or unexpressed counts for me.
I ask every Briton to support me in my appeal to the British at this very hour to retire from every Asiatic and African possession, and, at least, from India. That step is essential for the safety of the world and for the destruction of Nazism and Fascism. In this I include Japan’s “ism” also. It is a good copy of the two. Acceptance of my appeal will confound all the military plans of all the Axis Powers and even of the military advisers of Great Britain.
If my appeal goes home, I am sure the cost of British interests in India and Africa would be nothing compared to the present ever-growing cost of war to Britain. And when one puts morals in the scales, there is nothing but gain to Britain, India and the world.
Though I ask for their withdrawal from Asia and Africa, let me confine myself for the moment to India. British statesmen talk glibly of India’s participation in the war. Now India was never even formally consulted on the declaration of war. Why {17} should it be? India does not belong to Indians. It belongs to the British. It has been called a British possession. The British practically do with it as they like. They make me – an all-war resister – pay a war tax in a variety of ways. Thus, I pay two pice as war tax on every letter I post, one pice on every postcard, and two annas on every wire I send. This is the lightest side of the dismal picture. But it shows British ingenuity. If I was a student of economics, I could produce startling figures as to what India has been made to pay towards the war, apart from what are miscalled voluntary contributions. No contribution made to a conqueror can be truly described as voluntary. What a conqueror the Briton makes! He is well saddled in his seat. I do not exaggerate when I say that a whisper of his wish is promptly answered in India. Britain may, therefore, be said to be at perpetual war with India which she holds by right of conquest and through an army of occupation. How does India profit by this enforced participation in Britain’s war ? The bravery of Indian soldiers profits India nothing.
Before the Japanese menace overtakes India, India’s homesteads are being occupied by British troops – Indian and non-Indian. The dwellers are summarily ejected and expected to shift for themselves. They are paid a paltry vacating expense which carries them nowhere. Their occupation is gone. They have to build their cottages and search for their livelihood. These people do not vacate out of a spirit of patriotism. When this incident was referred to me a few days ago, I wrote in these columns that the dispossessed people should be asked to bear their lot with resignation. But my co-workers protested and invited me to go to the evacuees and console them myself or send some one to perform the impossible task. They were right. These poor people should never have been treated as they were. They should have been lodged suitably at the same time that they were asked to vacate.
People in East Bengal may almost be regarded as amphibious. They live partly on land and partly on the waters of the rivers. They have light canoes which enable them to go from place to place. For fear of the Japanese using the canoes, the people have been called upon to surrender them. For a Bengali to part with his canoe is almost like parting with his life. So those who take away his canoe, he regards as his enemy. {18}
Great Britain has to win the war. Need she do so at India’s expense? Should she do so?
But I have something more to add to this sad chapter. The falsity that envelops Indian life is suffocating. Almost every Indian you meet is discontented. But he will not own it publicly. The Government employees, high and low, are no exception. I am not giving hearsay evidence. Many British officials know this. But they have evolved the art of taking work from such elements. This all-pervading distrust and falsity make life worthless, unless one resists it with one’s whole soul.
You may refuse to believe all I say. Of course, I shall be contradicted. I shall survive the contradictions.
I have stated what I believe to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
My people may or may not approve of this loud thinking. I have consulted nobody. This appeal is being written during my silence day. I am just now concerned with Britain’s action. When slavery was abolished in America, many slaves protested, some even wept. But protests and tears notwithstanding, slavery was abolished in law. But the abolition was the result of a bloody war between the South and the North; and so though the Negro’s lot is considerably better than before, he still remains the outcaste of high society. I am asking for something much higher. I ask for a bloodless end of an unnatural domination and for a new era, even though there may be protests and wailings from some of us.
V. Confusion
| “India has no quarrel with the British people. I have hundreds of British friends. Andrews’ friendship was enough to tie me to the British people. But both he and I were fixed in our determination that British rule in India, in any shape or form, must end.” |
There is evidently confusion in some minds about my invitation to the British to withdraw. For, a Britisher writes to say {19} that he likes India and her people and would not like willingly to leave India. He likes, too, my method of non-violence. Evidently, the writer has confused the individual as such with the individual as the holder of power. India has no quarrel with the British people. I have hundreds of British friends. Andrews’ friendship was enough to tie me to the British people. But both he and I were fixed in our determination that British rule in India, in any shape or form, must end. Hitherto the rulers have said: “We would gladly retire if we knew to whom we should hand over the reins.” My answer now is: “Leave India to God. If that is too much, then leave her to anarchy.”
I invite every Britisher who loves Britain, India and the world to join me in the appeal to the British Power and, if it is rejected, to adopt such non-violent measures as would compel the Power to comply with the appeal.
VI. Implications of Withdrawal
| “It has cost me much to come to the conclusion that the British should withdraw from India, and it is costing me still more to work out that conclusion. It is like asking loved ones to part, but it has become a paramount duty.” |
[The following are the questions put by a representative of The News Chronicle (London) to Gandhi at Bombay and the latter’s replies to them:]
Q. You have recently asked the British to withdraw from India. Do you think it possible in the present circumstances for them to withdraw all at once? To whom are they to entrust the administration?
A. It has cost me much to come to the conclusion that the British should withdraw from India, and it is costing me still more to work out that conclusion. It is like asking loved ones to part, but it has become a paramount duty. And the beauty and the necessity for withdrawal lie in its being immediate. They and we are both in the midst of fire. If they go, there is a likeli-{20}hood of both of us being safe. If they do not, Heaven only knows what will happen. I have said in the plainest terms that in my proposal there is no question of entrusting the administration to any person or party. That would be a necessary consideration, if the withdrawal was part of a settlement. Under my proposal, they have to leave India in God’s hands – but in modern parlance to anarchy, and that anarchy may lead to internecine warfare for a time or to unrestrained dacoities. From these, a true India will rise in the place of the false one we see.
Q. How is your policy of non-embarrassment reconcilable with this advice?
A. My policy of non-embarrassment remains intact in terms in which I have described it. If the British withdraw, surely there is no embarrassment; not only so, they become eased of a tremendous burden, if they would calmly consider the meaning of the enslavement of a whole people. But if they persist, well knowing that they are surrounded by hatred, they invite embarrassment. I do not produce it by stating the truth, however unpalatable it may appear for the moment.
Q. Already there are signs of civil insecurity; and would not life be even more insecure, were the present administration suddenly to withdraw?
A. Of course, there is civil insecurity, and I have already confessed that insecurity is likely to increase very much only to give place to real security. The present insecurity is chronic and, therefore, not so much felt. But a disease that is not felt is worse than one that is felt.
Q. Were the Japanese to invade India, what would your advice be to the Indian people?
A. I have already said in my articles that it is just likely that the Japanese will not want to invade India, their prey having gone. But it is equally likely that they will want to invade India in order to use her ports for strategic purposes. Then, I would advise the people to do the same thing that I have advised them to do now, viz., offer stubborn non-violent non-cooperation, and I make bold to say that, if the British withdraw and people here {21} follow my advice, then non-cooperation will be infinitely more effective than it can be today, when it cannot be appreciated for the violent British action going on side by side.
VII. Some Questions and Answers
| “I will do nothing in haste, but there is the fixed determination behind every act of mine that the British must withdraw.” |
Explaining at a Press Conference at Bombay the implications of his suggestion to the British to withdraw from India, Gandhi answered some important questions as follows:
Q. There is a report about some new scheme that you want to propound in one of your Harijan articles about non-violent non-cooperation if any invader came to India. Could you give us an idea?
A. It is wrong. I have no plan in mind. If I had, I should give it to you. But I think nothing more need be added when I have said that there should be unadulterated non-violent non-cooperation, and if the whole of India responded and unanimously offered it, I should show that, without shedding a single drop of blood, Japanese arms – or any combination of arms – can be sterilized. That involves the determination of India not to give quarter on any point whatsoever and to be ready to risk loss of several million lives. But I would consider that cost very cheap and victory won at that cost glorious. That India may not be ready to pay that price may be true. I hope it is not true, but some such price must be paid by any country that wants to retain its independence. After all, the sacrifice made by the Russians and the Chinese is enormous, and they are ready to risk all. The same could be said of the other countries also, whether aggressors or defenders. The cost is enormous. Therefore, in the non-violent technique I am asking India to risk no more than other countries are risking and which India would have to risk even if she offered armed resistance.