The Truce Months, March-December 1931
- Around September-October 1930, Civil Disobedience movement entered a second, more contradictory phase, as:
- Pressures were mounting as the Depression began having major impact
- Incidents of poor peasant and tribal militancy and violence multiplied in many areas
- Official reports began speaking of a marked decline of enthusiasm and support among urban traders, many of whom started breaking earlier pledges not to sell imported goods
- Almost all leading Congress leaders were put behind bars
- With the signing of Gandhi-Irwin pact in 1931, the Congress withdrew the Civil Disobedience Movement immediately
- Also, Gandhi agreed to attend the second Round Table Conference, more or less on British terms, in sharp contrast to his stand until the end of January 1931
- Even Gandhiji’s request for remitting the death sentence on Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru was turned down by the Viceroy, and they were executed on 23rd March 1931
- Thus, Civil Disobedience had died a sudden death, ending “not with a bang but a whimper”, according to Nehru
- On the other hand, the impact of the Pact and Truce months was not entirely negative, as:
- The British, after all, had to negotiate with Gandhi on terms of equality and courtesy for the first time, and this was something deeply resented by many die-hard officials
- The released Congressmen seem to have gone back to their villages and towns with undiminished confidence, almost as victors
- The Congress at this time was in fact was seeking to establish itself as the alternative, more legitimate centre of authority, starting arbitration courts to settle local disputes, and trying to mediate conflicts
1932-34: Civil Disobedience Again
- Changed Government Attitude After Second RTC
- The higher British officials had drawn their own lessons from the Delhi Pact which they thought had raised the political prestige of the Congress and the political morale of the people and had undermined British prestige.
- There were three main considerations in British policy:
- Gandhi would not be permitted to build up the tempo for a mass movement again.
- Goodwill of the Congress was not required, but the confidence of those who supported the British against the Congress, government functionaries, loyalists, etc. was very essential.
- The national movement would not be allowed to consolidate itself in rural areas
- At this time, the Congress Working Committee decided to resume the Civil Disobedience Movement
- As a consequence, on January 4, 1932, Gandhi was arrested
- Government Action
- A series of repressive ordinances were issued which ushered in a virtual martial law, though under civilian control, or a ‘Civil Martial Law’, under which
- Congress organisations at all levels were banned
- arrests were made of activists, leaders, sympathisers;
- properties were confiscated
- Gandhi ashrams were occupied
- A series of repressive ordinances were issued which ushered in a virtual martial law, though under civilian control, or a ‘Civil Martial Law’, under which
- Response of Indians
- People responded with anger. Though unprepared, the response was massive. In the first four months alone, about 80,000 satyagrahis, mostly urban and rural poor, were jailed
- Other forms of protest included
- picketing of shops selling liquor and foreign cloth
- illegal gatherings, non-violent demonstrations
- celebrations of national days, symbolic hoistings of national flag,
- non-payment of chowkidara tax,
- salt satyagraha
- forest law violations and
- installation of a secret radio transmitter near Bombay
- However, this phase of the movement could not be sustained because:
- Gandhi and other leaders had no time to build up the tempo; and
- the masses were not prepared
- As a result, Gandhi decided to withdraw the Civil Disobedience movement in April 1934
- Notable gains made during this phase
- As the mass movement gradually declined in face of ruthless repression, political ‘realism’ combined with economic calculation of certain sections of Indians pushed Indian big business towards collaboration with the British
- Bombay Millowners concluded the Lees-Mody Pact in October 1933, aligning with Lancashire out of fear of Japanese competition
Aftermath of Civil Disobedience Movement
- The British Government’s sense of Illusionary Victory was quickly, swept when the Congress captured the polls in most provinces in 1937
- The Congress had been defeated by superior brute force, but its mass prestige was high as ever
- The Left alternatives emerged from the logic of Civil Disobedience itself, for the Movement had aroused expectations which Gandhian strategy could not fulfil.
- At the level of leadership, Nehru (and, less consistently, Bose) voiced the new mood, emphasising the need to combine nationalism with radical social and economic programmes
- In this changed situation, the dominant groups within the Congress were able to retain control only by a series of adjustments and openings towards the left, though usually at the level of programmatic statements and not action
- An early indication of such a shift was the Karachi declaration on fundamental rights and economic policy, made-significantly-just after the Gandhi-Irwin Pact
- On the whole, after the end of Civil Disobedience Movement, though crucial political controls within the national movement remained elsewhere, much of the Congress language and rhetoric, and some actual policies, did have to take a Leftward direction as a consequence of the growing assertiveness of these sections of Indian society.
