|
On The Fifty Third Anniversary Of Our Independence
Harkishan Singh Surjeet IT is fifty-three years since the country won freedom from the British rulers. The nature of that freedom struggle and the goals which it raised, have governed the path we have traversed in this past half-century. After centuries of colonial rule, the British colonialists were forced to quit and hand over the levers of power to the Congress and the Muslim League. Though the struggle for independence had begun immediately after the British seized power, in the absence of any organised political force the movement was initially disorganised, the first organised resistance came in the form of the 1857 Revolt, sparked by the Sepoy Mutiny and perceptively called by Marx the First War of Independence. Though this revolt failed in completing the objective that it had set before itself, it succeeded in generating an anti-imperialist consciousness among the Indian people. As is known, the leadership to the 1857 Revolt was given primarily by the aggrieved feudal princes and landlords whom the British rulers were utilising as their allies, having deliberately retained the feudal system intact. Founder of the Namdhari sect, Guru Ram Singh was the first to
raise the slogan of non-cooperation and boycott of British goods and services,
including the posts and railways and the use of hand-spun cloth, khadi. He was
externed from the country and deported to Burma; many of his followers The British rulers, using the raw material from their colonies for manufacturing goods in England -- the entire purpose of their occupation -- imposed severe restrictions on the production and distribution of several products and goods in the country. This naturally led to great resentment among the people and in the Punjab, for example, in Layalpur, a big mass rally was held addressed by Lala Lajpat Rai, Ajit Singh and Bankar Dayal against this policy. Though ultimately the British had to yield to their demands, Lala Lajpat Rai and Ajit Singh were externed, the latter having to stay abroad till India became independent. The first organised political force in India came with the formation of the Indian National Congress, though its objective was not the overthrowing of British rule in India. Rather it saw itself more as adviser and petitioner to the British raj, more of a club or debating society. Later increasing consciousness among the people and the growth of anti-imperialist sentiment began to cast its influence on the Congress Party necessitating a change in its outlook. It was the 1917 Russian Revolution that provided the big impetus to the struggle for independence, inspiring large sections of the people, the working class, the peasantry, the intelligentsia, etc., oppressed by British rule, and the independence struggle gained momentum. Different revolutionary groups emerged actively working with the aim of overthrowing British imperialism through arms. Not confined to any one state, such groups emerged all over the country. Jugantar and the Anushilan, in UP and other northern states the Hindustan Socialist Republican Army of which Bhagat Singh was one of the important organisers. In Punjab the Ghadhar Party. Similarly in the southern part of the country, various other militant organisations sprang up. Together these forces became a source of inspiration for the youth throughout the country and roused them to the level of readiness to sacrifice their lives for the country if need be. Even earlier, by 1912-13, the slogan of independence from British raj had reached the Indians emigres to the United States. Eventually many of them were to sacrifice their lives for the cause of freedom and many others to undergo long years of severe, and some life imprisonment. BRITISH COUNTER- RESPONSE The only answer the British rulers had to the rising tide of the movement, was brutal suppression using crude and inhuman methods. The deliberate massacre of innocent people who had assembled peacefully at Jalianwala Bagh was a prime though no isolated example of the manner in which the British rulers sought to suppress and repress the movement. To this violence Mahatma Gandhi laid emphasis on non-violence, and wherever the movement took militant shape he tried to stop its advance. Though the Communists and Left played a very important role in this movement, particularly in rousing and moblising the working class and peasant masses, it was the Congress which remained in the forefront. Despite the predominant role played by the Congress, it would be wrong to deny the role played by the other political forces, in particular the role of the Left should not be underestimated. Despite this, the Congress too, not wishing to disturb the feudal relations in the countryside, was constrained to raise anti-feudal slogans in order to rally the mass of the people behind it. This was particularly so when in the mid-thirties Jawaharlal Nehru became the Congress President and began talking of socialism, and .took up an anti-feudal stance. By this time the working class movement led by the Left had grown and the peasantry too was getting organised. The dominant leadership of the Congress was opposed to these slogans, Gandhi's opposition to militant slogans and actions was well-known. It was because of this and after the ebbing of the 1932 civil disobedience movement, which left the young people in the Congress disappointed and disillusioned, that the formation of the Congress Socialist Party, took place. As the Communist Party had been declared illegal many of the Communists were working both inside the Congress and the Congress Socialist Party. FINAL PUSH The end of the Second World War saw a big post-war upsurge throughout the country and taking on the form of a revolt, raisied the anti-imperialist and anti-feudal struggle to new heights. The Tebagha struggle in Bengal, the Punnapara Vayalar struggle in Kerala, the revolt by the Warli tribals in Maharashtra, the struggle of the Surma Valley peasants in Assam and the heroic Telengana armed struggle in Andhra Pradesh, combined with the Naval Mutiny and the strikes and hartals demanding the release of the INA prisoners, posed a severe threat to British rule. It was at this juncture that the British realised that it would no longer be possible for them to stay in India, and the Congress realised that it would be not be long before control of the movement passed out of its hands. The result was a compromise struck between the Congress Party and the British. This mass participation in the revolutionary upsurge sweeping across the whole of India, had brought to the forefront of the political agenda, the revolutionary demands of the common people and first and foremost sweeping land reforms against fedual oppression, redistribution of land, and an end to the old landlordism; for food, housing and employment through industrial development, for better education; protection and development of their language and culture -- in all, the aspirations for a better future. These were the slogans raised by the trade unions, the peasant organisations and organisations of students and intellectuals in the stormy years pre-1947. THE ASSESSMENT Fifty-three years later, when we look back, we find that many of these aspirations of the Freedom Movement remain unfulfilled. While there has been tremendous growth both in agriculture and industry, the fruits of such development have not gone to those who brought about this growth, and been equitably distributed. Rather a small section of the population has cornered the benefits while the vast multitude has been loaded with intolerable burdens far beyond its capacity to sustain. The rich continue to get richer and the poor poorer. While some miniscule benefit has trickled down, it is the gap between the two that it getting wider and wider. Land reforms have not been carried out in most parts of the country except for the Left-ruled states. In other states where reforms have been instituted the process has been reversed with the initiation of the policies of liberalisation and privatisation. Ceiling laws are sought to be amended to benefit the rich and landed gentry, the agro-business houses and multinationals. The self-sufficiency that the country achieved in foodgrain production, the industrial growth achieved with an important part played by the public sector -- all are sought to be done away with. The unrestricted import of agricultural commodities combined with the dismantling of the public sector is doing immense harm to Indian agriculture and industry. Peasants in various parts of the country are fearful at the government allowing unrestricted import of agriculture products, where already they are suffering huge losses, culminating in a number of suicides in different parts of the country. SURRENDER TO IMPERIALISM Initiated in 1991 by the Congress government, the BJP-led government is vehemently pursuing the same economic policies. Earlier advocating Swadeshi, the BJP is doing the exact opposite now. In the sphere of foreign policy also, the priorities of the ruling establishment have changed, with the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the reverses to socialism and the emergence of the USA as the sole superpower facilitating this switch. This change in foreign policy direction is also directly linked to the initiation of the policies of liberalisation and privatisation at home, at the behest of the imperialist multi-nationals through their agencies of the World Bank and the IMF. It was not, however, until the BJP gained the levers of power at the centre, that a complete reversal of India's foreign policy -- non-alignment with an anti-imperialist thrust, solidarity with national liberation movements and for elimination of nuclear weapons and world peace, and building and strengthening friendly relations with its neighbours -- came about. This earlier thrust of India's foreign policy was a natural outcome of the independence movement with its objective of independent and self-reliant economic development. The BJP as a party has always been hostile to the principle of Non-Alignment as the basis of India's foreign policy. The BJP and its earlier incarnation, the Jan Sangh, always craved for recognition of India by the United States and repeatedly expressed its willingness to be its junior partner. This changed outlook was to be seen in the Vajpayee government's refusal to condemn the US missile attacks on Sudan and Afghanistan in 1998, its failure to mobilise world opinion against the NATO aggression in Yugoslavia, and so on. While Russia and China and various other countries have openly voiced concern and opposition to the National Missile Defence (NMD) system being developed by the US, the Indian government refuses to even take note of it. The culmination, however, has been the servile attitude nakedly displayed during the visit of President Clinton to India. Patriotic self-respecting citizens had to hang their heads in shame at this unabashed exhibition of subservience. THE TASK BEFORE US The task now before the people is clear. While observing the 53rd anniversary of independence, while rededicating ourselves to fulfill the aspirations and dreams of the Freedom Movement, we will also have to pledge to foil the game of imperialism and the right-wing reactionary forces in our country who seek to undermine this independence, take away our sovereignity and the benefits that the people have gained in these years. It is for us to see that the sacrifices made by those who made our freedom possible, do not go in vain. India has still to make her "Tryst with Destiny". |
