Rise of Communal Majoritarianism in British India – Some Historical Insights -3
By Professor Nazeer Ahmed
Concord, CA
The Shifting Borders of Bengal and its consequences for Hindu-Muslim tensions
The Indian National Congress became increasingly strident in its demand for self-government. This alarmed the British and increased the insecurity of the Muslims who feared the domination of Hindus in an independent India. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, founder of Aligarh University, wrote in 1890:
“Now God has made them (the British) rulers over us. Therefore, we should cultivate friendship with them, and should adopt that method by which their rule may remain permanent and firm in India, and may not pass into the hands of the Bengalis ... If we join the political movement of the Bengalis our nation will reap a loss, for we do not want to become subjects of the Hindus instead of the subjects of the ‘ people of the Book ...’ "
Bengal was a large province with a population of over 70 million. Calcutta, its capital city, was a hotbed of Indian nationalism. The eastern part of the province was predominantly Muslim whereas the western part was Hindu. Ostensibly to improve the administration, the British partitioned Bengal into two in 1905. The Muslim majority areas were bundled together with
Assam to create a new province of East Bengal. The partition had the political benefit of weakening the power of the elite Hindu nationalists in Calcutta who depended on large land holdings in East Bengal for their income.
The origin of the present-day crisis with the Citizenship Amendment Act 2019 is to be sought in the first partition of Bengal of 1905. Bengal (today’s Bangladesh and the Indian province of West Bengal) lies at the confluence of two major river systems in South Asia, namely, the Ganga (Ganges) and the Brahmaputra. Heavy rains in Assam (300 inches a year) cause frequent flooding in the Brahmaputra river. The shifting water of the river make and unmake small islands each year. The Bengalis, a hardy and resourceful people, have adapted to the maverick ways of the river systems and have learned to crop the islands as well as the delta systems of the rivers for jute, rice and fisheries. Population pressures have forced them to migrate time and time again. With each migration, the hardworking Bengalis turned the inundated lands of the delta into fertile lands.
So, it was, the first partition of Bengal in 1905 brought a large number of Bengalis into what is today Assam. The Bengali migrations that started during the British era altered the demography of the region and sowed the seeds of current agitations in Assam against “foreigners”. The Bengalis were both Hindu and Muslim. However, the partition of Bengal into Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan in 1947 highlighted the Muslim component of the migrants. The following map shows the areas around modern-day Bangladesh that are Muslim, as a result of the migrations during the British colonial era.
Gandhi’s Early Years
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi is an enigmatic figure in world history. Acclaimed as the Father of the nation in India and as a Mahatma (great and noble soul) the world over, he has been variously called a saint, a great Hindu, a shrewd politician and an opportunist. While his non-violent methods inspired leaders like Martin Luther King in the United States, his actions in India, early in his career, contributed to the injection of religion into the independence struggle and were in part responsible for the bloody partition of British India in 1947 into India and Pakistan. His main achievements were that he made India aware of itself and he forged together a Hindu nation out of a plethora of castes. Einstein called him a saint, Jinnah called him a great Hindu leader, the Dalit leader Ambedkar termed him a shrewd politician, Nobel Laureate Naipaul called him a political failure and Professor Eqbal Ahmed called him an opportunist.
The early years of Gandhi in South Africa are shrouded in controversy. During the Second Boer War (1902), he served as a Sargent Major supporting the European settler armies against the African states (1902). In 1914, he returned to India. World War I broke out and the Indian army was coopted to serve in the Middle East and North Africa. Gandhi supported the British war effort recruiting Indians as combatants to fight the Germans. Supporting a resolution for the war effort in 1918, Gandhi wrote: "With a full sense of my responsibility, I beg to support the resolution."
World War 1 ended with a complete victory of the allies. Kaiser’s Germany was on its knees and the Ottoman empire was dissolved with Britain, France and Italy carving out zones of influence. Under the Treaty of Sèvres (1920), Syria, Iraq and Egypt were severed from the Ottoman empire. Hejaz (Mecca and Medina) came under British influence.
In 1914, the Ottoman Empire was the only large independent state and the Sultan was the spiritual head, the Caliph of Sunni Islam. The dismemberment of the Ottoman empire and the curtailment of the powers of the Caliph were unpopular with the Indian Muslims. The Khilafat Movement (1920-22) grew as a Muslim religious mass movement in South Asia to protect the Caliphate. By this time, Gandhi had emerged as the leader of the Congress party. Seeing an opportunity for Hindu-Muslim cooperation and to force the British into granting India self-government, Gandhi threw his support behind the Khilafat Movement and was selected by the Muslims to lead it. This was by far the first and the most effective cooperation between the Hindus and the Muslims of the subcontinent. Gandhi tried to forge this unity into a non-violent movement but when a group of demonstrators were fired upon by the police in 1922, and the demonstration turned violent, Gandhi pulled out of the Khilafat Movement.
The Khilafat Movement marks a watershed in the history of India and Hindu-Muslim relations. This was the first time since the uprising of 1857 that the Hindus and Muslims had worked together. But the price paid was the injection of religion into politics. Nationalists like Jinnah warned against the dangers of a marriage of religion and politics but were shunted aside in the mass hysteria of the times. The Pan-Islamic tones of the Khilafat Movement alarmed the Hindus. Hindu-Muslim tensions increased through the 1920s and the two great communities drifted apart.
Gandhi’s consolidation of Hindu Majoritarianism
The British were alert to the Hindu Muslim cooperation during the Khilafat Movement as well as the increasing rift between the two communities after its failure. Ostensibly, under an imperial declaration to increase Indian participation in self-governance, a Central Legislative Assembly was formed, a large number of whose members would be elected by Indians. To fully exploit the growing Hindu Muslim animosities, separate electorates were introduced for Hindus and Muslims while reservations were made for the Dalits (SC/ST), the Christians, the Sikhs, the Europeans and civil servants.
The census of 1931 showed a total population of 337 million for British India, of whom 54 percent were caste Hindus, 17 percent were SC/ST and 23.4 percent were Muslim. The Indian component of the Central Legislative Assembly reflected these proportions. As demands for self-government increased under Gandhi’s leadership, the British called a series of Round Table Conferences in London to evolve a consensus between Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, the Indian princes and the SC/ST about the modalities of self-government. It was at this conference that Gandhi played a pivotal role to consolidate the SC/ST, who were hitherto outside of the caste system, under a single “Hindu” umbrella.
The electoral calculus was obvious. In a united India, caste Hindus would be about 54 percent, a bare majority and would have to share power with other minorities including the Muslims, the Sikhs, the Christians and Dalits. But if the SC/ST who made up 17 percent of the population were counted as Hindus, they would enjoy a commanding majority of 71 percent.
Gandhi was the sole representative of the Congress party at the conference. The SC/ST delegation was led by Dr Ambedkar. Gandhi insisted that he be recognized as the sole spokesman for all “Hindus” including the SC/ST. This was unacceptable to Ambedkar and the conference collapsed.
Upon his return from London, Gandhi embarked on a “fast unto death” unless Ambedkar agreed to include the SC/ST under a caste Hindu umbrella. Anti-Dalit riots broke out in several cities and multiple threats were made against the life of Ambedkar. The coercive tactics paid off. Under relentless and violent pressure, Ambedkar caved in and signed the so-called Gandhi-Ambedkar pact (1932) which recognized SC/ST as Hindus in return for reservations in jobs and political representation within the Hindu fold. Gandhi then broke his fast.
Gandhi had succeeded in forging a Hindu nation which would politically dominate a united India once the British left. It was a major achievement for Gandhi. Hindu majoritarianism was set in concrete. It was something that had eluded the great Hindu sages and reformers of the past. Henceforth, a triumphant Gandhi would face the British and the minority Muslim community from a position of a commanding Hindu majority. For this achievement alone, Gandhi deserved to be called a great Hindu.
Even to this day, the Dalits continue to be outside the Hindu caste structure and are persecuted by upper caste Hindus but are nonetheless counted as “Hindu” for political purposes. (Continued next week)
Back to Pakistanlink Homepage
