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

Oseni Salutes Senator Folarin’s Decades of Service at 61

Published

on

By

 

Engr. Aderemi Oseni, representing Ibarapa East/Ido Federal Constituency of Oyo State in the House of Representatives, has paid tribute to former Senate Leader, Senator Teslim Folarin, on his 61st birthday, celebrating his decades of dedicated service and contributions to Oyo State and Nigeria at large.

In a statement issued on Wednesday by his media aide, Idowu Ayodele, in Ibadan, Oseni, who also serves as Chairman of the House Committee on Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA), lauded Folarin’s unwavering commitment to leadership and the well-being of the people.

Highlighting the All Progressives Congress (APC) gubernatorial nominee in the 2023 elections for three terms in the Senate, the lawmaker noted that Folarin’s legacy of service continues to be a guiding light for emerging leaders and a source of inspiration for countless individuals across the state.

“Senator Folarin has built an admirable legacy through years of selfless public service, consistently advocating for progress and unity,” remarked Oseni.

Reflecting on Folarin’s role as the Ikolaba Olubadan of Ibadanland, the lawmaker commended his leadership approach, which has bridged divides, fostered coalitions, and promoted initiatives aimed at stabilising democracy.

“Senator Folarin’s career is an example of visionary leadership,” he added, “and his commitment to public service will leave a lasting legacy for generations to come.”

As Senator Folarin marks this milestone, Oseni extended warm wishes for his continued health and success, expressing hope that his exemplary life of service will keep inspiring positive change across the nation.

 

Continue Reading

Politics

Ugandan Court Hands Ex-LRA Commander 40-Year Sentence

Published

on

By

 

In a historic ruling, a Ugandan court on Friday sentenced former Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) commander Thomas Kwoyelo to 40 years in prison.

This landmark decision, marking the first time a member of the notorious LRA has faced trial for war crimes in a Ugandan court, follows the group’s brutal two-decade insurgency against the Ugandan government.

Kwoyelo, who was convicted in August on 44 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, faced charges including murder, rape, torture, pillaging, abduction, and the destruction of settlements for internally displaced people.

(FILES) Thomas Kwoyelo a commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army rebellion blamed for brutal civilian murders during a 20-year war in the north of the country is brought into a courthouse in the northern Ugandan town of Gulu on July 25, 2011. – A Ugandan court on October 25, 2024 sentenced former Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) commander Thomas Kwoyelo to 40 years in prison after a landmark war crimes trial over his role in the group’s two-decade reign of terror. The sentence against Kwoyelo, who was convicted on 44 counts of crimes against humanity in August, was announced by Michael Elubu, the lead judge in the case at the court in the northern city of Gulu. (Photo by MICHELE SIBOLINI / AFP)

Michael Elubu, lead judge of the case at the International Crimes Division (ICD) of Uganda’s High Court, delivered the sentence in the northern city of Gulu, underscoring a rare moment of accountability in the decades-long history of the LRA’s violence.

Judge Elubu stated that Kwoyelo retains the right to appeal both his conviction and sentence within 14 days.

Kwoyelo, who was abducted by the LRA at the age of 12 and later rose to a low-level command position within the organization, denied all charges brought against him.

(FILES) Suspected LRA (Lords Resistance Army) member Thomas Kwoyelo is pictured during a pre-trial session at the High Court in Kampala on Februay 1, 2017. – A Ugandan court on October 25, 2024 sentenced former Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) commander Thomas Kwoyelo to 40 years in prison after a landmark war crimes trial over his role in the group’s two-decade reign of terror. The sentence against Kwoyelo, who was convicted on 44 counts of crimes against humanity in August, was announced by Michael Elubu, the lead judge in the case at the court in the northern city of Gulu. (Photo by GAEL GRILHOT / AFP)

The Lord’s Resistance Army, founded by Joseph Kony in the 1980s, sought to establish a regime based on the Ten Commandments. Under Kony’s leadership, the group unleashed widespread terror across Uganda and neighboring regions, resulting in over 100,000 deaths and the abduction of 60,000 children.

The violence eventually spread to Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and the Central African Republic.

Continue Reading

Politics

“A Perfect Fit”: Rep Oseni Applauds Sunday Dare’s Appointment as Presidential Adviser on Public Communications

Published

on

By

The Chairman of the House Committee on Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA), Engr. Aderemi Oseni has hailed the appointment of Chief Sunday Dare, Agbaakin of Ogbomosoland and former Minister of Youth and Sports Development, as Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Public Communication and National Orientation, describing  it a “perfect fit.”

In a statement released Thursday by his media aide, Idowu Ayodele, in Ibadan, Oseni praised Chief Dare’s extensive background in journalism and public service, adding that his vast experience will significantly enhance national communications and orientation efforts.

“Chief Dare’s illustrious career, from his pioneering role in Nigerian journalism as a founding member of The News and Tempo magazines to his strategic leadership as Minister of Youth and Sports Development under President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration, speaks volumes about his commitment to national development,” he remarked.

Oseni, who also represents the Ibarapa East/Ido federal constituency of Oyo state,  noted that Chief Dare’s new role comes at a critical time when fostering national unity and effective public engagement is crucial, stressing that his deep understanding of media, both locally and internationally, will strengthen public trust in government communications.

“As an accomplished journalist and public servant, Chief Dare is uniquely positioned to reshape the national narrative and bolster public confidence in government communication efforts,” the lawmaker said.

He expressed confidence that Dare’s appointment will not only advance the ideals of democracy and transparency but also serve as a point of pride for Ogbomosoland and Oyo State.

The APC chieftain wished Chief Dare success in his new role, pledging his unwavering support in ensuring the objectives of the office are fully achieved.

Continue Reading

Trending