Latest news with #QuitIndiaMovement
Scroll.in
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Scroll.in
From the memoir: A former Army general recalls how soldiers opted to fight for India's freedom
On 7 December 1941, Japan came into the war against the United States. This naturally brought in Britain on the side of US, and India, as part of the British Empire, also became involved in the war with Japan. For her defence against Japan, India depended on Singapore as her bastion in the east. By the surprise attack on Pearl Harbour and the capture of the Philippines by the Japanese, Singapore was considerably weakened. Singapore's defences faced the sea, with the land approaches in the rear, undefended. Further, the Japanese had organized an elaborate espionage system in Singapore with the help of the local Chinese inhabitants living in the city, who gave up-to-date and accurate information on the day-to-day movements of British and Indian troops. Again, no one then believed that an attack could be mounted on Singapore by land, because of the extraordinarily long lines of communication through an inhospitable country. So, Singapore was unprepared from a land attack by Japanese – the bastion found itself unprepared, and it fell unexpectedly and rapidly. After the fall of Singapore, the Japanese drive towards Rangoon gained momentum. Rangoon was evacuated on 7 March 1942, and thousands of Indians began their track to India through the difficult jungles of the Arakan. Here, the forethought of the British in building communications became apparent. The fall of Rangoon had brought the war close to us, as Gen. Alexander's forces withdrew to the Eastern Gates of India, after fighting retreating battles in Burma against overwhelming odds, over such routes which we had helped to build. Defence measures had, therefore, to be concentrated in India, but full support for the war was lacking because Britain had failed to exercise sufficient effort in getting India to commit herself in the early days. This was unfortunate, as in September 1939, a wave of sympathy for England and against the totalitarian countries and against Hitler, had spread throughout the country, and there was a general feeling that India could have been easily persuaded to declare war against totalitarian aggression. But technically, India was at war when Britain was, and India was deemed committed without her leaders being consulted. It had even provided the troops which had helped delay the first German attack on Paris. The principal political party, the Indian National Congress, which was then fighting for India's political freedom, felt that as Britain was not prepared to recognize India's freedom after the war, Indians would come more and more to believe that this was not India's war despite Japan entering it, and the war reaching the very borders of the country. It was against this background that, in 1942, Gandhiji launched the Quit India Movement, which later that year turned to overt action. So, the relations between the British and the Congress became further strained. In retrospect, events appear to have been the natural outcome of the failure to get the cooperation of the Congress leaders, when it was still possible, in the early days of the war. In spite of these political differences inside the country, events in India moved fast. With Hitler's invasion of Poland, the army in India was mobilised in September 1939, and Indian troops began arriving in Suez from October 1939 onwards. The role assigned to this force was the Middle East and Africa, but some ancillary units were sent to France to provide transport cover to the British Expeditionary Forces. Among them was Capt Anis Ahmed Khan, who was earlier with us in the Madras Pioneers. During the retreat from Dunkirk, he was taken prisoner and remained in Germany throughout the war. I was disappointed that although we were the first troops to leave India for overseas duty, we did not contact the enemy till 1941, whereas those who left India after us, contacted the enemy almost immediately. During the Second World War, Indian Army units fought gallantly in France, Italy, Africa, the Middle East, Malaya, Burma and Indonesia, whilst at the same time protecting the North-West Frontier of India and carrying out their role of internal security within the country. These duties necessitated tremendous expansion. In October 1939, the strength of the army was approximately half a million, whilst in October 1944, it rose to over 2 million. Throughout this momentous period, our troops made substantial contributions to the Allied cause in the different theatres of war. About this time, news reached India of the formation of the Indian National Army (INA), under the dynamic leadership of Subhas Chandra Bose. When Singapore fell on 15 February 1942, some 60,000 Indian troops had joined what was named the 'Indian National Army'. This was to be the army of free India, with a provisional government under the presidency of Subhas Chandra Bose. But according to British Military Law, these men had committed the offences of mutiny, desertion and waging war against the king. For them, therefore, it was a very serious step particularly as their comrades, that is men of sister battalions of the same regiment and drawn from the same stock, were winning glory and admiration for their fellow soldiers, British and American, in North Africa, France and Italy. Perhaps the reason why some of these troops went over to the enemy was because of nationalistic fervour. Were these men right? These soldiers were recruited in the INA under the command of Capt. Mohan Singh, who made his choice from a genuine conviction and was prepared to suffer, and did, in fact, suffer for his beliefs. Further, the personality of Subhas Chandra Bose was overwhelming. But, in Military Law, the offence of mutiny cannot be condoned. This fact is of interest to the future leaders of our army. To new India, the Indian Army can only be a valuable asset if it preserves its loyalty and discipline. This question is of particular interest because there have been talks of independent states. It will equally be an offence if a soldier, in the event of a conflict with a state, prefers to fight for the state to which he belongs rather than to India as a whole. In December 1942, my name appeared in Indian Army Orders, to attend the Staff Course at the Command and Staff College, Quetta. About the same time, my posting orders came through appointing me to command an infantry battalion. I preferred this posting to an appointment of the staff. 'Staff' led to closer contact with senior commanders and gave an insight into higher military thinking. On the other hand, 'command' meant association with troops on active device, an experience to which I had been looking forward. I had had ample experience of regimental work; and was now anxious to 'command', particularly under conditions of modern war. So, I opted for 'command' in the hope of proceeding with a unit to a theatre of war. The 'command' came on 27 December 1942, of a newly raised battalion, the 6/19 Kumaon Regiment, which was then located at Bannu, on the North-West Frontier of India. The brigade commander felt that the battalion was not in very good shape, and I was given the task of preparing it for war in the shortest possible time. The regiment had good officers, six British and five Indian, the VCOs were men of experience; and the soldiers were young and active. What was required, however, was coordinated work and hard and intensive training; stress was also to be placed on discipline and firepower, as we had then to learn the special techniques required for conducting operations on the frontier, appreciating that the Pathans had a reputation for springing surprises, that they were good marksmen and very mobile on steep slopes. The Pathans carried merely a rifle and a bit of food. They were tough, used to the terrain and consequently very active. We, on the other hand, were handicapped with heavy boots and equipment and were not so mobile. We thus gave the enemy the advantage of mobility, and freedom to select the point of attack. The Pathans were also very clever with their ambushes, to which the only answer was to keep fully alert. An example of alertness is given in advance through Shakti Tangi at a time when no enemy had been seen. The intelligence officer of the South Wales Border Regiment spotted a cleft in the very close horizon, through which he could see daylight. Suddenly, daylight was blotted out, and he sensed that it was the enemy. As the men of the South Wales Borders took cover, there was a burst of enemy fire. The North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) has six frontier districts of the Punjab compared to six tribal areas administered directly by the Government of India. On the other side of the NWFP was the buffer state of Afghanistan, separating the two empires, the Russian and the British. The Durand Line, between Afghan territory and tribal areas which the British administered, bordered a belt of territory in which some tribes were vaguely regarded as British and others as Afghans; but neither were wholly subject to the authority of either power, though they were treated as British 'protected' persons. The tribes could thus play off the Amir of Afghanistan against the British, while the Amir intrigued with them to keep the British busy. People living in these areas were, therefore, very 'unsettled'.
Hindustan Times
07-06-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
No single entity can claim credit for India's freedom: RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat
NAGPUR: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat has said that 'no single entity' can claim 'exclusive credit' for the 'monumental achievement' of India's freedom from the British, underlining it was a result of the actions of countless individuals and groups. Bhagwat, speaking at a book release in Nagpur late on Friday, emphasised that the freedom movement began with the 1857 uprising, which ignited a struggle that led to India's liberation. 'Discussions about how the country gained its independence often overlook a crucial truth. It was not due to one person. The flames of the freedom struggle were ignited across the nation after 1857...,' he said. Bhagwat cited contributions of countless individuals and groups to the independence, dismissing the notion that a single entity could claim 'exclusive credit' for this achievement, without naming anyone. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological fount, RSS, have sought to counter the criticism of the latter's role in the freedom movement. Critics have long targeted the RSS for staying away from the freedom movement, even as its supporters argue it had a significant role, citing the involvement of leaders such as founder KB Hedgewar in the anti-colonial struggle under the influence of Lokmanya Tilak. Hegdewar, who was sentenced to one year's imprisonment for an anti-British speech in 1921, was also jailed for his involvement in the 1930 movement against the British salt monopoly. The RSS has argued that it focused on building a unified society, as social divisions led to India's subjugation, to counter criticism over its absence from the 1942 Quit India Movement. Critics argue that the writings of RSS leader MS Golwalkar, who called the anti-colonial movement reactionary and temporary and believed the real internal enemies needed to be fought, show that fighting the British was not the priority. They say RSS's aim was not the end of British rule but the establishment of a 'Hindu Rashtra', putting it at odds with a secular national movement under the then umbrella organisation Congress. On Friday, Bhagwat also elaborated on the RSS's role and philosophy and said many who speak of its merits and flaws may not be familiar with it. 'Those who take the time to understand our organisation often say they are impressed and have learned much.' He added that RSS derives its strength from the sacrifices of dedicated volunteers guided by collective decision-making. Bhagwat sought to address common misconceptions and insisted that it is not about individual accolades but the collective action of RSS members that is significant. 'The highest rank in the RSS is that of the ordinary volunteer,' he said. Bhagwat said dedicated members serving selflessly amid everyday life carry out the RSS's true work. He encouraged volunteers to expand their belonging networks and engage in selfless service. Bhagwat said that true happiness comes from identifying lasting fulfilment in helping others. 'Selfless service is the paramount goal for each [RSS] volunteer,' he said. Bhagwat said a volunteer's life is full of emotions while living among the people and performing their duty. 'But his experiences are extraordinary while remaining in an ordinary state,' he said. 'Whether anyone comes or not, he goes to the RSS shakha [gathering] daily, putting aside his problems, and helping others.' He said young RSS volunteers selflessly supported the armed forces by providing essential supplies during the 1971 Bangladesh liberation war. 'These acts of bravery and service may not have received widespread recognition, but they are integral lessons shared within the RSS,' said Bhagwat.
Indian Express
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Derek O'Brien writes: Cagey in the House
This week, leaders from 17 political parties wrote to the Prime Minister urging him to call a special session of Parliament in June. Within hours of doing so, a skittish government hurriedly announced the dates for a regular monsoon session starting July 21, seemingly turning down the demand for a special session. Normally, the lead time to announce a Parliament session (the number of days between announcement and commencement) has been around 20 days or less. The upcoming monsoon session has been announced 47 days in advance! At the time of going to press, another 250 MPs from the Opposition are endorsing the letter already dispatched by their party leaders to the Prime Minister. The demand for a special session was first raised by Kapil Sibal, eminent jurist and Independent MP, three days after the tragedy in Pahalgam. Opposition parties took the cue from there. Convening Parliament sessions: Let us start with the rulebook. Article 85 (1) of the Constitution stipulates, 'The President shall from time to time summon each House of Parliament to meet at such time and place as he thinks fit…' The letter signed by the Opposition parties has been addressed to the Prime Minister. Yes, calling a special session is a decision the Union government takes. In practice, when MPs ask for a special session, the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, after assessing the situation, (and accepting the need for a session) prepares a note, proposing the dates and duration. This is placed before the Cabinet Committee on Parliamentary Affairs. If the proposal is approved by the Prime Minister, the ministry then forwards it to the President, who formally approves and announces the session dates. It is another story if the government has what could be called, 'Parliament-ophobia' (noun) — the acute condition that is a morbid fear of facing Parliament. Precedents for special sessions: Even though there is no mention of a special session in the rulebook, there are numerous precedents. In 1972, a sitting was convened to celebrate 25 years of Independence. In 1992, Parliament held a midnight session to mark 50 years of the Quit India Movement. In 1997, a special session was called to commemorate 50 years of the Republic. Since 2014, three special sessions have been convened. One, in 2015, a two-day session, to commemorate the adoption of the Constitution in 1949. Two, in 2017, a midnight session, to introduce the Goods and Services Tax. In 2023, a five-day session, to mark the inauguration of the new Parliament building. The Women's Reservation Bill was also passed in the same session. These sessions to mark celebratory milestones are welcome. But the great halls of Parliament have to go beyond symbolism and anniversaries. There have been the odd occasions where governments have shown no urgency to break the routine. In 2006, over 180 people were killed in the Mumbai train bombings. Parliament waited for its next scheduled session before responding. After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, Parliament reconvened only when the pre-scheduled session resumed. Parliament must urgently deliberate and discuss the events that unfolded in Pahalgam, Poonch, Uri, Rajouri, and their aftermath. Here is the most convincing precedent. During the 1962 Sino-Indian War, the Leader of the Opposition, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, then a first-time Rajya Sabha MP, demanded a special session. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru agreed to this request, and the session was held when the active conflict was still on: 165 members participated in the debate — an open discussion on the war and government policy. In the past 15 years, many parliamentary precedents have been ignored. Just three examples: One, the position of the Deputy Speaker in Lok Sabha has lain vacant since 2019. Two, from seven out of 10 bills being sent for scrutiny to committees, now only about two out of 10 bills go. Three, Opposition MPs were denied their right to electronic voting during the passage of crucial bills like the farm laws. This Union government's tendency to cock a snook at the legislature has a history. Look at the track record of the legislative assembly of Gujarat from 2001 to 2012. The state assembly, under the then Chief Minister, sat for fewer times than it did under any previous CM of Gujarat. In this period, the average number of sittings of the Gujarat Assembly was less than 30 a year. Beat that! Are we surprised that this government has all but ducked out from calling a special session? I am not surprised. But I am reminded of my civics teacher in middle school. It was he who first told me: 'The government is answerable to Parliament. Parliament is answerable to the people.' So when Parliament is sidelined, who is the government answerable to? The writer is MP and leader, All India Trinamool Congress Parliamentary Party. Additional research: Chahat Mangtani, Ayashman Dey
The Hindu
04-06-2025
- General
- The Hindu
R.P.G.V. Govindan Chettiyar, the unsung freedom fighter from Erode
Tamil Nadu's contribution to the freedom struggle is a captivating chapter in the history of India's fight for independence. Many unsung heroes, who devoted their lives to the nation, remain largely unknown. One such hero is R.P.G.V. Govindan Chettiyar, born on July 27,1910 to Venkatachalam Chettiyar and Guruvayammal, at Chithode, a village in Erode Taluk, which was then part of the composite Coimbatore district. From an early age, he was deeply influenced by Gandhian principles. A passionate freedom fighter and dedicated Congressman, he played a crucial role in India's struggle for independence. Even as a school student, he participated in the Non-Cooperation Movement of 1920–21. On February 28, 1941, as a member of the erstwhile Coimbatore Zilla Congress Committee, he led a Satyagraha near the Chithode Mariamman Temple, demonstrating his unwavering commitment to the nation's freedom. Govindan Chettiyar was an ardent advocate of Gandhian principles. He strongly promoted the use of Khadi, believing that self-reliance in clothing would weaken the economic grip of the British. He also championed the cause of prohibition, considering liquor a social evil that hindered national progress. A staunch opponent of untouchability, he worked tirelessly for social harmony and uplift of the downtrodden. His efforts extended to promoting cottage industries, particularly in rural areas, to enhance self-sufficiency and economic independence among the poor. Govindan Chettiyar's patriotism was not confined to mere ideology; he took to the streets, mobilising people against British colonial rule. Between February 2, 1941 and March 9, 1941, he undertook a padayatra (march on foot) alongside K. S. Ramasamy of Gobichettipalayam (who later became the Deputy Minister for Home Affairs in the Union Cabinet), traveling through several towns and villages, including Perundurai, Kanchikoil, Chennimalai, Kunnathur, Thingalur, and Chithode, accompanied by Congress volunteers. These processions were not just demonstrations but platforms for public discourse, where he and his associates delivered powerful speeches on anti-war propaganda and the pressing need for Indian independence. His activism reached its peak in 1941 when he actively took part in the Individual Satyagraha movement, launched in then Madras under Mahatma Gandhi's guidance. As a result, he was arrested and sentenced to six months of imprisonment in the Madras prison. Even after his release, his spirit remained unbroken. During the Quit India Movement of 1942, when the British intensified their crackdown on nationalists, he went underground to continue his efforts against colonial rule. After independence, he served as a member of the advisory committee for the Erode National Expansion Scheme. He organised a team of volunteers to assist those affected by the devastating Bhavani flood. In his later years, he was compelled to sell his six acres of land due to financial family, consisting of nine members, including his wife Renganayaki, four sons, and three daughters, faced hardships due to a low income. Suffering from eye problems, he was unable to afford the necessary medical treatment. He had repeatedly requested the government to honor its earlier promise of providing 10 acres of free land (for freedom fighters). Additionally, he appealed to the government to retain the revolver that had been confiscated from his father under the National Security Act in 1932 due to his involvement in the Civil Disobedience Movement. Govindan maintained close political ties with prominent leaders and Congress stalwarts C. Subramaniam and K. Kamaraj. This association was evident from the letters preserved by his descendants, which highlight his active involvement in the political landscape of his time. Despite his contributions, he faced numerous personal and financial hardships in his later years. On August 2, 1993, Govindan passed, leaving behind a legacy of dedication and service. His sacrifices and relentless efforts serve as a testament to the courage and determination of Tamil Nadu's unsung heroes in the freedom struggle. Though his name may not feature prominently in mainstream history, his contributions remain invaluable in shaping India's journey to independence. Even after 78 years of independence, we are still to include in mainstream history several heroes of the freedom movement like Govindan. (The author is Head, Department of History, Chikkaiah Government Arts and Science College, Erode)
United News of India
30-05-2025
- Politics
- United News of India
Council Chamber: India's first Parliament House echoes legacy of freedom movement
Shimla, May 30 (UNI) Tucked away in the hills of Shimla, the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly building — known as the Council Chamber — stands as a silent witness to India's journey from colonial rule to democracy. Constructed between 1920 and 1925 during the British Raj, this grand structure originally served as the Central Legislative Assembly— the first Parliament House of India. Built at a cost of ₹10 lakh, the Council Chamber was not just a building but a political landmark of its time. It was here that Vithalbhai Patel, elder brother of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, made history in 1925 by becoming the first Indian President of the Assembly, defeating British candidate Frederick White by just two votes. His election marked a defining moment in India's legislative autonomy under British rule. The Assembly's Speaker's chair, crafted from fine teak, was a diplomatic gift from the Burmese government to the British — a relic that still occupies a place of pride in the House. The chamber also served as the venue for key developments that shaped India's democratic fabric, including the historic passing of the proposal to grant women the right to vote. Even the Quit India Movement, one of the most powerful calls for independence, found its early voice in this very hall — imbuing the site with revolutionary resonance. Today, the chamber continues to evolve with time. Modern legislative tools like zero hour and online committee participation have been introduced, marrying tradition with technology. The historic chamber received renewed attention today when the Government Assurances Committee of the Haryana Legislative Assembly, led by Chairman Bharat Bhushan Batra, paid a courtesy visit and toured the site, appreciating both its heritage and upkeep. UNI ML ARN PRS
