Connect with us

Politics

Churchill, the Greatest Briton, Hated Gandhi, the Greatest Indian || By RAMACHANDRA GUHA

Published

on

Exactly a century ago, Mahatma Gandhi began his first all-India movement against British colonial rule. Winston Churchill was, and continued to be, unimpressed by those efforts.

Within his homeland, Winston Churchill’s colossal contribution to saving his people from Hitler eclipses all else, and he is widely regarded as the greatest Briton of all time. So it came as something of a surprise when a senior Labour Party politician recently described him as a “villain” for having ordered troops to fire on striking workers in the Welsh town of Tonypandy in 1910. The claim provoked vigorous denunciations from prominent politicians, as well as more sober reflections in op-ed pages. When the dust settles, as it soon must, Churchill will revert to being the figure of sanctity that he has always been.

Within his homeland, that is. Outside the United Kingdom, Churchill has always had a decidedly mixed reputation. This is especially so in India, my own country, where his undying opposition to freedom for Indians is both well known and widely deplored. As is his hatred for Mahatma Gandhi, a figure he repeatedly mocked, callinghim (among other things) a “malignant subversive fanatic” and “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace.”

Churchill and Gandhi met once, in November 1906. The Englishman was then the undersecretary of state for the colonies; the Indian, a spokesman for the rights of his countrymen in South Africa. Back then, Gandhi wore a suit and tie, as befitting a lawyer trained in London. It is not clear whether Churchill remembered their meeting when, in the early 1930s, he began attacking Gandhi, whose Salt March had made waves around the world and established him as the preeminent leader of India’s struggle for freedom from British rule.

At the time, Churchill was out of office and seeking to rebuild his political career by working up British sentiment in defense of the empire. By the time he was prime minister a decade later, leading the fight against the Nazis, he remained implacably opposed to independence for Gandhi’s people. His senior cabinet colleague Leo Amery recalled how Churchill had once referred to Indians “as a beastly people with a beastly religion.” He might have added that their leader was, in his opinion, the beastliest of them all.

In August 1942, Gandhi launched his last great popular struggle, the Quit India Movement. He was immediately arrested and taken to a prison in Poona (now known as Pune). Churchill also convinced himself that Gandhi was acting on behalf of the Axis powers. Archived British documents show that in September 1942, Churchill wrote to Amery, “Please let me have a note on Mr. Gandhi’s intrigues with Japan and the documents the Government of India published, or any other they possessed before on this topic.” Three days later, Amery replied, “The India Office has no evidence to show, or suggest, that Gandhi has intrigued with Japan.” The “only evidence of Japanese contacts [with Gandhi] during the war,” Amery continued, “relates to the presence in Wardha of two Japanese Buddhist priests who lived for part of 1940 in Gandhi’s Ashram.”

The Quit India Movement was marked by protests across the country. A British government report blamed Gandhi for the violence that followed his arrest. Gandhi was hurt by the accusations, since he had always preached and practiced nonviolence. When the Raj refused to retract the accusations, Gandhi began a three-week fast in prison. Once again, Churchill developed unfounded suspicions about Gandhi, this time convincing himself that the Indian was secretly using energy supplements, and therefore not really fasting.

On February 13, 1943, Churchill wired the viceroy, Lord Linlithgow: “I have heard that Gandhi usually has glucose in his water when doing his various fasting antics. Would it be possible to verify this.” Two days later the Viceroy responded, “This may be the case but those who have been in attendance on him doubt it, and present Surgeon-General Bombay (a European) says that on a previous fast G. was particularly careful to guard against possibility of glucose being used. I am told that his present medical attendants tried to persuade him to take glucose yesterday and again today, and that he refused absolutely.”

As Gandhi’s fast entered its third week, Churchill again wired the viceroy:

Cannot help feeling very suspicious of bona fides of Gandhi’s fast. We were told fourth day would be the crisis and then well staged climax was set for eleventh day onwards. Now at fifteenth day bulletins look as if he might get through. Would be most valuable [if] fraud could be exposed. Surely with all those Congress Hindu doctors round him it is quite easy to slip glucose or other nourishment into his food.

By this time, the viceroy was himself exasperated with Gandhi. But no evidence showed that he had actually taken any glucose. So the viceroy now replied to Churchill in a manner that stoked both men’s prejudices. “I have long known Gandhi as the world’s most successful humbug,” Linlithgow fumed, “and have not the least doubt that his physical condition and the bulletins reporting it from day to day have been deliberately cooked so as to produce the maximum effect on public opinion.” Then, going against his own previous statement, the viceroy claimed that “there would be no difficulty in his entourage administering glucose or any other food without the knowledge of the Government doctors”—this when the same government doctors had told him exactly the opposite. “If I can discover any firm of evidence of fraud I will let you hear,” Linlithgow wrote to Churchill, adding, “but I am not hopeful of this.”

This prompted an equally disappointed reply from Churchill: “It now seems certain that the old rascal will emerge all the better from his so-called fast.”

In 1943, Lord Wavell replaced Linlithgow as viceroy. The prime minister warned Wavell “that only over his [Churchill’s] dead body would any approach to Gandhi take place.” Then he joked that Wavell had “one great advantage over the last few Viceroys”: They “had to decide whether and when to lock up Gandhi,” whereas this viceroy “should find him already locked up.”

Wavell, however, stood against Linlithgow and Churchill and believed that India should become independent. He released Gandhi from prison in May 1944. When World War II ended a year later and a Labour government came to power in Britain, Churchill’s reactionary policies were set aside, and formal negotiations for a transfer of power began. The British departed the subcontinent in August 1947, dividing it as they left into the separate, sovereign nations of India and Pakistan. Gandhi was murdered by a Hindu fanatic in January 1948.

These facts are well known. What is not is that Churchill’s dislike of Gandhi persisted even after British rule in India had ended and his adversary had died.

In 1951, Churchill published an installment of his war memoirs, The Hinge of Fate, and made an astonishing charge against Gandhi. The former prime minister claimed that the Indian had conducted his 1943 fast “under the most favourable conditions in a small palace” and that “the most active world-wide propaganda was set on foot that his death was approaching.” Then Churchill wrote, “It was certain, however, at an early stage that he was being fed with glucose whenever he drank water, and this, as well as his own intense vitality and lifelong austerity, enabled this frail being to maintain his prolonged abstention from any visible form of food.”

“In the end,” Churchill continued, “being quite convinced of our obduracy he abandoned his fast, and his health, though he was very weak, was not seriously affected.”

The publication of this volume of The Hinge of Fate created an uproar in India. Gandhi’s secretary, Pyarelal, and his doctor, B. C. Roy, wrote angry letters to Churchill, dismissing the Englishman’s claims as canards. Gandhi had refused to take glucose at any time during his fast—which Linlithgow had written to Churchill—even though a government doctor had warned him that he might die if he did not. Further, Gandhi had always said that his fast would last exactly three weeks.

The Indian press also responded with fury, archival materials show. The Tribune, a newspaper based in the northern-Indian city of Ambala, said Churchill’s charges had been refuted by those who had firsthand knowledge of Gandhi’s fast, and put Churchill’s baseless attacks in a broader context. “Mr. Churchill’s remarks only betray his lack of understanding of the Mahatma’s character and his general ignorance about this country,” the paper wrote. “Mr. Churchill is a great war-time leader. But no man is more insular in his outlook. He has yet to realise that the people of Asia, Africa and the Middle East are entitled to a life of their own. He still thinks in terms of the hegemony of the world by Anglo-Saxon peoples.”

Even sharper in its criticism was the now-defunct Indian News Chronicle. Its editorial on September 27, 1951, titled “Churchilliana,” said the former British leader’s memoirs were full of myths and misstatements, of which the calumnies against Gandhi were representative. Churchill’s “entire political career,” the paper thundered, “is a record of political opportunism, inconsistency, and downright wickedness.” Calling him a “friend of reaction” and “a high priest of British imperialism,” the editorial ended:

Mr. Churchill is incorrigible, hopelessly out of date, and is getting unpopular day by day. His memoirs might be read for their grandiloquent phraseology, bombast, and nineteenth century English, but no student of history will find his version of recent history a safe guide. The odds are that these memoirs, in course of time, will be rescinded to the dustbin. And as for his malicious attacks on Mahatma Gandhi, we are certain that they will deceive no one. Long after Churchill and his memoirs have been forgotten, humanity will continue to regard Gandhiji as a beacon of peace; and cherish his memory with reverence even as they cherish the memory of Jesus, Buddha and Socrates.

The Hindustan Times’ response was less polemical, but arguably more effective. The paper was then edited by Gandhi’s son Devdas, who dispatched a reporter to locate Major General R. H. Candy, the British doctor who had attended to Gandhi during his prison fast. Asked to comment on Churchill’s allegations, Candy, then living in retirement in rural Hampshire, confirmed that he had indeed advised Gandhi to take glucose, but that Gandhi had refused. “From my knowledge of Mr. Gandhi,” he said, “I am convinced that he would not willingly have taken glucose or any other form of food” during his fast. Churchill’s response to these corrections is unknown.

Recent works by Indians have blamed Churchill for the Great Bengal Famine of 1943, in which more than 2 million people died. As prime minister, Churchill could have done more to ensure speedy supplies of grain to the affected areas. But to call him a war criminal and a mass murderer, as some polemicists have done, is surely hyperbolic.

That said, there is no question that Churchill had an intense dislike of Indians in general, and a pathological suspicion of one Indian in particular. His venomous and long-lasting hatred of Gandhi shows that this great Briton could sometimes think and act like a small-minded parochialist.

 

 


This essay has been adapted from Ramachandra Guha’s book Gandhi: The Years That Changed the World, 1914–1948.

RAMACHANDRA GUHA is a historian based in Bengaluru.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Politics

Fresh N200bn Loan: Oyo APC Accuses Makinde of Pushing State Into Financial Ruin

Published

on

By

 

The Oyo State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) has fiercely opposed Governor Seyi Makinde’s move to secure a fresh loan of N200 billion, describing it as reckless and detrimental to the state’s financial future. The party called on concerned Nigerians to intervene and prevail upon the governor to abandon the borrowing plan.

According to the party, it said sources had revealed that Governor Makinde sought and secured approval for the loan on Tuesday, allegedly through the Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Hon. Debo Ogundoyin, and a few select lawmakers. It added that the governor’s request, contained in a letter dated 13th March 2025, cited the need to refinance an existing loan from a commercial bank.

In a statement issued on Tuesday and made available to journalists in Ibadan, Oyo APC’s Publicity Secretary, Olawale Sadare, condemned the move, insisting that the governor’s borrowing spree was driving the state into a financial mess.

“Another distressing development has emerged from the Oyo State House of Assembly today. The Speaker and a handful of his loyalists have secretly approved a fraudulent loan request from the governor without the knowledge of most of their colleagues. This decision was only made public through a post-plenary document released by the Clerk of the House,” the statement read.

Sadare decried the mounting debt profile of Oyo State under Makinde, alleging that the governor had already incurred over N300 billion in loans over the last six years. He questioned why, despite such heavy borrowing, the state had little to show in terms of infrastructural development, economic growth, and agricultural advancement.

“If the previous loans had been judiciously used to improve infrastructure, build the economy, and ensure food security through a sustainable agricultural revolution, there would be no need for concern. Unfortunately, the present PDP administration has demonstrated a lack of accountability and is determined to mortgage the future of Oyo State,” he said.

The APC spokesman further questioned the rationale behind the fresh loan request, citing the substantial revenue inflows into the state’s coffers.

“For the record, Governor Makinde receives an average of N11 billion in federal allocation and another N11 billion on behalf of the 33 local government councils. In addition, the state generates no less than N3 billion in Internally Generated Revenue, bringing the total monthly revenue to at least N25 billion. The critical question now is: what exactly is he doing with this massive income, and why does Oyo still need another huge loan?”

Sadare accused the governor of failing to prioritise essential needs despite the available funds, lamenting that workers in state-owned tertiary institutions were not being paid a living wage, while key sectors such as emergency response, agriculture, and education remained neglected.

“Oyo State cannot even afford five fully functional fire trucks to tackle emergencies. Farmers lack access to modern equipment, while the state’s public schools are deteriorating rapidly. Yet, Governor Makinde, who has failed to complete an ordinary bus terminal after allegedly spending N20 billion, has now set his sights on an airport upgrade project as another means to siphon public funds,” he added.

The APC spokesman also took a swipe at Speaker Ogundoyin, accusing him of acting as a rubber stamp for the governor’s financial dealings.

“The manner in which this N200 billion loan was hurriedly approved exposes the Speaker as a willing accomplice in Makinde’s financial recklessness. However, justice will eventually prevail, and no one involved in this dubious scheme will escape accountability,” Sadare warned.

As of the time of filing this report, efforts to get a reaction from the Oyo State government and the Speaker of the House of Assembly were unsuccessful.

 

Continue Reading

Politics

Former PDP Governorship Candidate Jandor Returns to APC

Published

on

By

FILE: Jandor Adediran. Twitter@PDPVanguard

A former governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Lagos, Abdul-Azeez Adediran, popularly known as Jandor, has officially rejoined the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Jandor announced his return to the ruling party at a press conference in Lagos on Monday, approximately two weeks after resigning from the PDP.

In his address, he explained his decision, stating that APC prioritises electoral victory regardless of the candidate.

“We have decided to return to the All Progressives Congress, APC,” he declared.

Anticipating criticism over his political move, he referenced a Yoruba proverb, saying:

“Before you are quick to remind me of the reasons why I dumped APC, I want to say that there is a Yoruba adage that says, if a woman has not tried two husbands, she would not know which one is better.”

Jandor had previously left the PDP on 3rd March 2025, citing what he described as anti-party activities by some leaders in Lagos State.

“We were waiting to see if the party at the national level, governed by its constitution, would address these anti-party activities. Instead of sanctions, the same individual was appointed Vice Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee,” he said at the time.

Following his resignation from the PDP, Jandor met with several political figures, including President Bola Tinubu and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, as well as other key stakeholders in Nigeria’s political landscape.

Jandor’s political journey began with the APC, where he led the Lagos4Lagos Movement before defecting in 2022. He joined the PDP ahead of the 2023 governorship election and became the party’s flagbearer in Lagos, but lost to APC’s Babajide Sanwo-Olu.

Continue Reading

Politics

El-Rufai Urges Atiku, Obi, Others to Join SDP, Rules Out Merger

Published

on

By

 

Former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, has dismissed the possibility of a political merger ahead of the 2027 general election, instead urging former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, ex-Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, and other opposition figures to join the Social Democratic Party (SDP).

El-Rufai’s call came in the wake of his resignation from the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) on 10 March, citing a misalignment of values with the party.

In a recent interview with BBC Hausa, the former governor appealed to opposition leaders to unite under the SDP banner to challenge President Bola Tinubu’s administration in the next election.

“My wishes and prayers are that Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, Rotimi Amaechi, Rauf Aregbesola, and all opposition leaders join SDP—not to form a merger or register a new party, but to work together towards 2027,” he said.

El-Rufai also expressed his disappointment in the current administration, stating that despite initial confidence in Tinubu’s leadership, he had failed to meet expectations.

“What pains me is that the government we supported and believed in would perform well because we saw what Tinubu achieved in Lagos despite his challenges,” he remarked. “We all know about his issues in Chicago, but we thought if he could replicate his work in Lagos at the national level, we should support him. However, he has failed.”

Meanwhile, the Presidency has dismissed speculation surrounding the 2027 elections, maintaining that President Tinubu is focused on economic reforms and national development.

In a statement on Friday via X (formerly Twitter), Tinubu’s Special Adviser on Media and Public Communications, Bayo Onanuga, stated:

“President Tinubu is not worried about the next election. He is concerned about the shared prosperity he can bring to Nigerians. He is focused on ensuring that, by the end of his first term, he can look back and say, ‘I have impacted the lives of Nigerians and turned this economy around.’”

Onanuga also highlighted the administration’s achievements, including improved foreign reserves, reduced inflation, a growing trade surplus, and increased foreign investments.

Addressing speculation about his own presidential ambition in 2027, El-Rufai said his candidacy would depend on the party and the will of the people.

“It is not for me to decide; it is the party and the people that will decide. Even when I was contesting for governor, it was the people who met and convinced (Muhammadu) Buhari, and he called me to run,” he said.

As political alignments continue to take shape ahead of 2027, El-Rufai’s defection and his call for opposition unity signal growing tensions within Nigeria’s political landscape.

Continue Reading

Trending