INDIA’S DECISION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24890, 14 April 1942, Page 5

INDIA’S DECISION

OBSTACLE TO REFORMS CONFLICT BETWEEN FACTIONS (N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent) LONDON, Apl. 12. Disappointment at the result of Sir Stafford Cripps’s mission to India is tempered by the belief that the world outside India is convinced of the fairness of the British proposals. It is felt that one highly important result has been achieved, namely. Britain has put herself completely in the right regarding India with the United States and China, and also Prussia. In the past dispassionate but emphatic American judgment was. if anything, too sympathetic with the Indian claims, but in the proposals Sir Stafford Cripps conveyed Britain went to the fullest lengths that could be asked of her, for which reason it is felt that the Americans and other Allied nations have no doubt where the responsibility for the breakdown lies.

Informed quarters here feel that Cabinet’s plan, without being revolutionary, went as near to squaring the circle in reconciling the conflicting Indian claims as it could contrive. In addition, an outstanding merit of the Government’s proposals was that they finally placed the responsibility for India's future upon the shoulders of the Indians themselves. The core of the Indian difficulty is the conflict between the Hindus and Moslems, but Britain is not responsible for this cleavage, except by creating the possibility of a representative Government. Attitude of Leaders The Sunday Times comments: Under autocratic rule Hindus and Moslems, while bitterly disliking each other, have not felt that either community will tyrannise over the other, but in proportion as the elective Government becomes a factor that fear springs to life. It has been the main obstacle to reform ever since the Simon Commission report. It is a problem for which in the last resort none but the Indians themselves can find a solution. The Cripps plan threw squarely upon them the onus of doing so. Fundamentally, that is why it was hard for them to accept the plan. “The leaders of the rival Indian communities have never been past the stage of each asserting claims which they know Ihe other side will not admit. It is easier for the leader, whether Hindu or Moslem, to continue in that straightforward but unprofitable path than seek any compromise with the other side at the risk of forfeiting his popularity with his own. The controversy over a defence member enabled the two communities once more to burke Ihe issue. That is not imputing to them total insincerity, but the British Government’s modifications to meet them would have been accepted had Congress liked the scheme as a whole.”

Unparalleled Action

Mr J. L. Garvin, in the* Sunday Express, says: “ There has been no parallel in any age for this supreme e ffprt of the spirit of peace and conciliation amid the tumult and destruction of the war of wars. That effort sought to conjure agreement by consent from seething contradictions and clenched antagonisms. Success would have refreshed all the hopes and dreams of free mankind. Though there is a throw-back for a time the ideal can never be abandoned. Its purpose will be renewed.” So India continues as previously. It is expected that when Parliament reopens Mr Churchill may state that Britain’s offer will still be open when the fighting ends if Indian politicians can find a formula for reopening the negotiations.

DEFENCE OF INDIA

CONGRESS LEADER’S VIEWS (Rec. 7 p.m.) NEW DELHI, Apl. 12. “Indians certainly will not give in to invaders.” said the Indian Congress leader. Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru. “I want to fight the idea that Indians must remain passive and cannot do anything against the Japanese.” he said. “It would be a tragedy for the world if Japan and Germany dominated the world. I wanted India to play a more effective part in the world drama. India present is the crux of the war. This is realised by people throughout the world, excepting big people at New Delhi and Whitehall, who, are slow in understanding and comprehension. The average Indian reaction to the breakdown of the British proposals will naturally be one of irritation against Britain, but Indians cannot afford to be bitter.” Pundit Nehru said he disagreed with Mr Gandhi’ opposition to a “scorched earth ” policy in India. He explained that he would destroy everything of value to the enemy, irrespective of ownership, “I am afraid,” he continued, “that if the British Government, as at present constituted, carries out a “scorched earth” policy in India, it will follow it in a wrong, perverted way, thinking partly of hampering the Japanese, but greatly hampering India. I am not, therefore, prepared to trust Britain's ‘scorched earth’ policy. For the first time in 22 years I swallowed many a bitter pill when I said I was prepared to agree to many things in order that an agreement could be reached. I wanted to throw all my sympathy and energy into organising the defence of India. I conceived every man and woman doing something, and not surrendering, even if trained armies failed.” Sir Stafford Cripps and his party have arrived at Karachi, en route to London.

SIR STAFFORD CRIPPS

STILL HOPEFUL OF AGREEMENT (Rec. 10 p.m.) LONDON, Apl. 13. ‘ 1 have not lost hope that India will one day come to an agreement.’’ said Sir Stafford Cripps in an interview at Karachi. “There will always be chances, and we must come to some agreement some day. but I have no idea when it will be. It depends on the Indians themselves. We offered everything we could; there was nothing more to offer.” He said that the Congress wanted all or nothing. They could not have all, so they got nothing. Sir Stafford said if the Indian leaders agreed on a solution the Government would certainly consider it, but the initiative must come from them. When asked whether there would be more repression in India following the breakdown, Sir Stafford said that if there was any interference with the war activities there would be trouble. After all, somebody had to carry on the war. He emnhasised that General Johnson’s participation was entirely unofficial. It was the Congress that first approached General Johnson for help. President Roosevelt had no part in matters.

BRITAIN’S INTENTIONS

NO DOUBT ABOUT SINCERITY (Rec. 7 p.m.) LONDON. Apl. 12. Statements by the Congress verify the assumption that the party rejected the proposals because the form of centra! government contemplated for the duration of the war did not fulfil the party's demands for a National Government with a Cabinet making majority decisions which the GovernorGeneral would be obliged to accept. The New Delhi correspondent of The Times says; “This implies that the Congress rigidly adheres to its former constitutional demands, although these have long been opposed by all the minority elements. The form of government demanded by the Congress would have vitiated the whole purpose of the British declaration, which sought lo establish a reconstructed executive under the present Constitution, while making clear that the post-war governmrnt would be devised by Indians in a manner enabling the minorities to accept the Constitution under which they would be expected to live, “It is significant that during the New Delhi consultations the party

leaders did not meet among themselves with the object of securing a general measure of agreement,” the correspondent continues. “ Indeed, during the past few days other political elements have viewed with increasing distrust the efforts which have been made to encourage the Congress to accept the British proposals. It is obvious that Sir Stafford Cripps has gone a long way in his desire to meet the party's demands, particularly regarding defence, and the executive envisaged for the interim period would virtually have resulted in the transfer of all portfolios to Indians. In assessing the results of the mission, it will be found that the gains clearly offset the losses. India and the world no longer doubt the sincerity of British intentions.”