• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Decolonisation in India.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Decolonisation in India Howard Brasted That Britain played any positive role in dismantling the Raj and setting up in its place the sovereign states of India and Pakistan, is now almost totally discounted in the historiography of decolonisation in India. It was only in the warm aftermath of independence that part of that story was defined in terms of British imperial planing. This version, concentrating on British administration and achievements, had India being practically wet-nursed to freedom through a series of progressive, graduated, constitutional stages. Thus, when the settlement of 1947 finally arrived, it was presented as a long-standing rather than a last-minute destination, the culmination rather than the confounding of British rule. It followed that power was actually transferred to India and Pakistan as an act of statesmanship. A counter version, identifying an all embracing Indian nationalism as the major factor undermining the colonial order, had the Indian people being led out of bondage by means of orchestrated, mass agitation. Accordingly, constitutional concessions were wrested from a parsimonious and reluctant empire; they were never freely given. It was only when faced with total administrative collapse and the prospect of being bodily thrown out that the British decided to cut their losses and run. ...read more.

Middle

Should indigenous government begin to threaten British interests, the Viceroy's veto might be invoked to protect them. Indeed, no major British statesman in the depression era believed that there would be a full transfer of power within their life-times, let alone the next decade. With a clear itinerary and timetable of de-commission blurred, so by extension was any ideological commitment to the goal of Indian freedom. If the Conservatives, who dominated government in the interwar years, were shown predominantly framing answers to the Indian Question with an eye to keeping British hands firmly on the 'gears' of India, J. A. Gallagher's somewhat cynical theory of 'interpenetration' proceeded to associate the Labour Party with much the same priority. Socialists were just closet Tories, surreptitiously rather than openly committed to shoring up imperial control. Conjuring up the notion that a broad bipartisan agreement was reached about retaining a foothold in India Gallagher proceeded to pass off independence as a 'new technique' designed to contrive this. That Labour's brand of devolution was really imperialism camouflaged, was taken further by Anita Inder Singh who espied in the Attlee government's negotiating strategy a devious bid to secure the 'very survival of Pax Britannica'. With the possible exception of R. ...read more.

Conclusion

AU this amounted to and became widely known at the time as Labour's 'ballot box' principle of 'democratic self-determination'. That Labour was not able fully to supply its method until 20 February 1947 had little to do with any alleged 'interpenetration' with the Tories or other presumed handicaps. It had everything to do with contingencies inspired by the war, the unamenability of Churchill during it and the diversionary tactics of Wavell after it. Proclaiming, despite constant briefings, that he did not know what Labour's itinerary was, the Viceroy persistently departed from to route Labour had long proposed to take; hence his dismissal. Even with such obstacles-Labour still managed to initiate the two most important moves that were made to bring about a settlement prior to the final breakthrough-the Cripps Offer of 1942 and the Cabinet Mission of 1946. Although these failed this had much less to do with ideological insincerity, hidden agendas or lack of commitment to ending the Raj, than with the intractability of communal discord. CONCLUSION To date most of the action has been focused on the Indian side of the field. But can the plays of Indian nationalism and Muslim separatism, important though they were, be fury appraised without reference to the specific initiatives Britain actuary took? Unless due regard is given to that aspect the story of decolonization is left unbalanced and incomplete. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. Party system in India

    Although the Congress retained power at the Union level by a narrow margin of 54% of Lok Sabha seats in the 1967 elections, the party rule crumbled in 8 States. Rajni Kothari spoke of the dominant party model giving way to a more differentiated structure of party competition.

  2. 'Nationalist Groups in the Sub-Continent played the most significant role in Britain's decision to ...

    This was a severe drawback for them as they found that the Hindus were now in better positions in government than they were and thus felt that the British favoured Hindus Sentiments of Indian nationalism were expressed as early as 1885 at the Indian National Congress, which was predominantly Hindu.

  1. This dispute dates back to the partition of the British Indian Empire, in August ...

    Their struggle was, and remains, largely peaceful. India sought to suppress their movement with massive use of force, killing hundreds of innocent men, women and children. This led some of the Kashmiri youth to take up arms in self defence.

  2. How far were Gandhi's actions after 1920 responsible for Indiagaining her independence in 1947?

    Gandhi, a pacifist by nature, opposed the war effort but also used it to try and, in one final push, gain independence. Congress leaders backed Gandhi by refusing to support the war effort unless India could participate as an independent state.

  1. The development of nationalist movements in Southeast Asia

    In 1923, a very moderate group comprising the intellectual class, officials and landowners formed the Constitutionalist Party in 1923 in Saigon. In Cochin-China political parties were not prohibited. This party was therefore the first legal political party of Vietnam.

  2. Comparative Analysis: The churches and their affect on society and politics in the cases ...

    In a country with a Christian majority, ecumenism can be a powerful force for socio-political change in a situation of oppression. This is because groups unite behind a common symbol. However when the threat of oppression disappears, the common symbol fades, ecumenism weakens, and the socio-political clout of the churches dissipates, leaving them vulnerable to political ideologies.

  1. Describe the part played by India in the Second World War.

    Britain decided to quit India because there was less support from the Indians after the World War Two, because they thought that the British army did not fight for India during World War One. There was also a mutiny in the Indian navy, and it soon spread to the army,

  2. Devolution is not a "constitutional settlement" but a dynamic (and potentially destabilising) process. ...

    They demanded their own courts of law and also to keep control over their churches, disregarding the Church of England. One final significant difference is the emergence of Edinburgh as a competitor to London. With their own separate body of Scots' law, the supreme courts in Edinburgh "offer a high-level

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work