THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS SATURDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1939 INDIA AND THE WAR

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23489, 28 October 1939, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS SATURDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1939 INDIA AND THE WAR

Various leaders of Indian opinion have, in the past few days, stated their attitude toward co-operation in the war effort of Britain and the Empire. The declarations have been precipitated by* a statement the Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, made last week explaining Britain's war aims and the effect of the present world situation on India's immediate future. He had done this, according to the text of what he said, in order to answer inquiries from many representative Indians regarding the two points already mentioned, and also as to the possibility of Indian co-operation in the war. Britain's objective was defined as resistance to aggression whether directed against herself or others. A temporary suspension in developing India's march toward completely responsible government was indicated, with a promise that it would be resumed after the war. These were the two outstanding passages of the statement. They are the two upon which almost all comment has been directed. Of the responses to it, three arc most significant. The National Liberal Federation, even more impressive in calibre than in numbers, said the statement was not satisfactory, but its main objection appeared to be that the Indian National Congress was given too much scope and excuse for irresponsible action. The Moslem League expressed partial satisfaction with what the Viceroy said, asked for clarification of certain points and gave an assurance that it would co-operate in the war effort. The third and in. many ways most important comment came from the National Congress. It rejected the statement as wholly unsatisfactory, said it could not co-operate in the war, and called on the provincial Governments to resign office. The attitude of the Congress demands first consideration because it is the strongest, the most active and the most forceful organisation in India. It controls nine out of the 11 Governments in the provinces. In five it has an actual majority, in two commands the largest party, and is predominant in two because the other grouj|p have not been able to achieve a common purpose. In two only, Bengal and the Punjab the Legislatures, with Moslem majorities, are quite free of Congress discipline. The resolution condemning Lord Linlithgow's statement was long and diffuse. It denounced Britain's war aims as Imperialistic and declared that it did so on behalf, not of India alone, but of the whole world. Some of the wording might have come direct from Moscow. After the declaration came the still small voice of Mr. Gandhi saying the Viceroy's statement had not an irrevocable effect, and that the moderation of the Congress resolution still left the door open. These two circumstances are significant. Though it purports to speak for all India, the Congress is not itself a united body. It has two distinct wings, often in sharp conflict. At the beginning of this year, Mr. Subas Chandra Bose was elected president. This was a reverse for Mr. Gandhi and his associates, who had openly supported the other candidate. It was also a victory for the Left, of which Mr. Bose is the leader. Shortly afterwards 13 members of the. Working Committee, th 3 executive body of Congress, resigned, declining to serve under the leadership of Mr. Bose. In May he resigned the presidency and went out into the wilderness as leader of a "Left Bloc." It was quite obvious that his resignation had been forced by the Right of the Working Committee, behind which was thrown the weight of Mr. Gandhi's prestige. The < wording of the resolution rejecting Lord Linlithgow's statement suggests another success by the Left.-Its .resemblance to the language of Moscow does not mean that the Left of Congress is actually Communist, though both Communists and Socialists have supported Mr. Bose. By warning the people against civil disobedience and strikes it shows a hopeful moderation. At the same time it displays an intransigence that the Right would probably not have adopted, if only for tactical reasons. It is the ambition of Congress to speak for all India, and it often claims to do so. The claim is disputed, most of all by the Moslems. The Moslem League, headed by Mr. M. A. Jinnah, has recently said that it alone can speak for Moslem India. This' reaction toward the war situation is going to widen the breach that has always existed, more or less, between Congress and the Moslem League. The Liberal Federation is apparently apprehensive of what Congress will do. The attitude of the Princes, who rule the Native States, is not at all in doubt. One after another, they have declared themselves unequivocally on the side of the Empire at war, and given substantial evidence of their determination to assist to the limit of their powers. All these elements must march together if the ultimate objective of a self-governing India, with a federal constitution, is to be attained. The attitude of Congress will not help to produce the essential, unity either now or after the war. In fact it may nullify progress that has already been made. For that reason its tone of uncompromising hostility to Britain's war aims is to be deplored. It is not only unwelcome in the crisis the Empire faces, it may prove of poorservice to Indian domestic accord. So far it is only a resolution. Its practical significance will be more apparent when the time comes for the Provincial Governments to obey the order to resign. That moment must be awaited with the hope that before it,arrives a more constructive policy may be substituted for the present altitude of barren negation Congress is displaying..