The end of the Raj

In the aftermath of the Pacific War, the first clear sign that a new Asia was emerging from the ashes of that conflict came in 1947 with the most dramatic act of decolonization yet to take place — the end of British rule in India.

During the inter-war period Britain had attempted to use both coercion and concession in equal measure in its efforts to remain in India. However, by the end of the Second World War this policy was no longer attractive or feasible. India was now in a state of expectation following the promises of independence that had been made during the war, and, moreover, was in danger of breaking down into inter- communal violence. This was because, while the Congress Party's leaders had been imprisoned, the leading voice of the Islamic community, the Muslim League, had strengthened its position to the extent that it could now effectively veto any arrangement for the transfer of power that was against its interests. In such a volatile situation it was clear that if Britain wished to reassert its control and once again drag out its withdrawal, it would have to pay a high price both financially and militarily. Britain, under the new Labour government of Clement Attlee, was in no mood to make such a commitment. After all, Britain's economic interests in India had been in decline for a number of years and the hope existed that independence would not entirely sever the connection with the subcontinent, rather that India would accept Dominion status and become an active member of the Commonwealth.

Accordingly, from 1946 Britain began actively to negotiate a transfer of power, but this did not prove to be an easy matter, for when independence was granted in August 1947 it was not to one unitary state, but to two — India and Pakistan. The partition of India occurred because Congress and the Muslim League had fundamentally incompatible ideas about how to constitute a single successor state to British rule.

Put simply, the Muslim League desired a weak political centre and the devolution of power to groups of provinces, which would allow the Muslim- majority areas a good deal of autonomy, while Congress sought the construction of a strong centralized state in order to achieve its social and economic goals. With neither side willing to compromise and the country on the brink of chaos, the easiest solution was partition. The result was that the Muslim-majority areas of Baluchistan, Sind, the North-West Frontier, the western half of the Punjab and the eastern half of Bengal were amalgamated into the state of Pakistan under the premiership of the leader of the Muslim League, Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Meanwhile India gained its independence under the leadership of Jawaharlal Nehru, the head of the Congress Party. Moreover, it quickly added to its territorial area by bribing or coercing the heads of the Princely States to merge their states into India.

The actual partition process was a painful one, for in the Punjab and Bengal those who found themselves on the wrong side of the religious divide were forced to flee for their lives and hundreds of thousands were killed. Another terrible legacy was left in one of the largest of the Princely States, Kashmir, whose Hindu ruler decided to merge his kingdom into India, even though 70 per cent of the population was Muslim. Pakistan was naturally furious at this outcome, although its protests reflected the province's strategic importance as much as its demography, for it had no desire to see India control the headwaters of the Indus. However, Nehru rejected Pakistan's claim to the province, stating that the religious affiliation of the population was of no matter as India was a secular state. The outcome was a brief war in 1948 and a lingering dispute that has at regular intervals brought conflict to the subcontinent.

Despite the unintended appearance of two successor states, the independence of India was an event of great importance for Asia, for it symbolized and further stimulated the desire to rid the continent of European colonialism.

Moreover, in the figure of Nehru it produced an eloquent spokesman for the interests of Asian peoples. However, in the other major area of Asia still under colonial rule, SouthEast Asia, the road to independence was to prove considerably more complex. Unlike India, this region saw a power vacuum develop at the end of the Pacific War, which had important implications for the return of colonial power. Furthermore, in contrast to the subcontinent, its mineral wealth made it a vital pawn in the growing ideological confrontation between the Western Powers and the Soviet Union.

Dominion

A completely self-governing colony which is freely associated with the mother country. Within the British Empire, the Dominions were Australia, Canada, the Irish Free State (1922—49), New Zealand and South Africa.

Commonwealth, The

An organization of independent self-governing states linked by their common ties to the former British Empire.

Princely States

The states in British India that remained formally under the control of local rulers rather than direct British administration. They included states such as Hyderabad and Kashmir.

Kashmir

Province in the north-west of the Indian subcontinent. Although mainly Muslim in population, the Hindu ruler in 1947 declared his allegiance to India. Pakistan reacted by seizing control of some of the province. Divided ever since by what is known as the Line of Control, Kashmir has been a perpetual sore in IndoPakistani relations. Terrorist campaigns by Islamic militants in the 1990s led the two countries to the brink of war on a number of occasions.

see Chapter 4

see Map 10.1

Viet Minh

Vietnamese, communist-led organization whose forces fought against the Japanese and the French in Indochina. Headed by Ho Chi Minh, the Viet Minh was officially in existence from 1941 to 1951.

see Chapter 12

<< | >>

↑

Source: Best Antony. International History of the Twentieth Century and Beyond. Routledge,2008. — 638 p.. 2008

The end of the Raj

More on the topic The end of the Raj: