Khilafat Non-Copperation Movement

Background

The background to the movements was provided by the impact of the First World War, the Rowlatt Act, the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre and the Montagu- Chelmsford Reforms.

• During the post First World War period the prices of daily commodities increased sharply and the worst sufferers were the common people. The volume of imports which declined during the First World War again increased towards the end of the war. As a result the Indian industries suffered, production fell, many factories were closed and the workers became its natural victims. The peasantry was also under the heavy burden of rents and taxes. So the economic situation of the country in the post-war years became alarming. In the political field the nationalists were disillusioned when the British did not keep their promise of bringing in a new era of democracy and self-determination for the people. This strengthened the anti-British attitude of the Indians.
• The next important landmark of this period was the passing of the Rowlatt Act in March 1919. This Act empowered the Government to imprison any person without trial and conviction in a court of law. Its basic aim was to imprison the nationalists without giving them the opportunity to defend themselves. Gandhi decided to oppose it through Satyagraha. March and April 1919 witnessed a remarkable political awakening in India. There were hartals (strikes) and demonstrations against the Rowlatt Act.
• The same period witnessed the naked brutality of the British Imperialists at Jallianwala Bagh, in Amritsar. An unarmed but large crowd had gathered on 13 April 1919 at jallianwala Bagh to protest against the arrest of their popular leaders Dr. Saifuddin Kitchlu and Dr. Satyapal. General Dyer, the military commander of Amritsar, ordered his troops to open fire without warning on the unarmed crowd, in a park from which there was no way out. Thousands were killed and wounded. This shocked the whole world. The famous poet Rabindranath Tagore renounced his Knighthood in protest.
• Introduction of another constitutional reform act which is known as the Government of India Act, 1919 further disillusioned the nationalist. The reform proposals failed to satisfy the rising demand of the Indians for self-government. The majority of the leaders condemned it as “disappointing and unsatisfactory.”

All these developments prepared the ground for a popular upsurge against the British Government. The Khilafat issue gave an added advantage to get the Muslim support and the final touch to it was given by Gandhi’s leadership.

The issue of khilafat

During the First World War Turkey allied with Germany and Austria against the Allied Powers. The Muslims all over regarded the Sultan of Turkey as their spiritual leader Khalifa, so naturally their sympathies were with Turkey. After the war, the British removed the Khalifa from power in Turkey. Hence, the Muslims started the Khilafat movement in India for the restoration of the Khalifa’s position. Their main demands were:

1.    Khalifa’s control should be retained over the Muslim sacred places,

2.    In territorial adjustments after the war the Khalifa should be left with sufficient territories.

In early 1919 a Khilafat Committee was formed in Bombay. The initiative was taken by Muslim merchants and their actions were confined to meetings, petitions and deputations in favour of the Khalifa. However, there soon emerged a militant trend within the movement. The leaders of this trend were not satisfied with a moderate approach. Instead they preached for the launching of a countrywide movement. They advocated, for the first time, at the All India Khilafat Conference in Delhi (22-23 November, 1919) non-cooperation with the British Government in India. It was in this conference that Hasrat Mohani made a call for the boycott of British goods. The Khilafat leadership clearly spelt out that in case the peace terms after the war were unfavourable to Muslims they would stop all cooperation with the Government. In April 1920, Shaukat Ali warned the British that in case the Government failed to pacify Indian Muslims, “we would start a joint Hindu-Muslim movement of non-cooperation.” Shaukat Ali further stressed that the movement would start “under the guidance of Mahatma Gandhi, a man who commands the respect of both Hindus and Muslims”.

The Khilafat issue was not directly linked with politics in India but the Khalifat leaders were eager in enlisting the support of Hindus. Gandhi saw in this, an opportunity to bring about Hindu-Muslim unity against the British. But in spite of his support to the Khilafat issue and being the president of the All India Khilafat Committee, Gandhi till May 1920 had adopted a moderate approach. However, the publication of the terms of the Treaty with Turkey which were very harsh towards Turkey, and the Publication of the Hunter Committee Report on ‘Punjab disturbance’ in May 1920 infuriated the Indians, and Gandhi now took an open position.

The Central Khilafat Committee met at Allahabad from 1st and 3rd June 1920. The meeting was attended by a number of Congress and Khilafat leaders. In this meeting a programme of non-cooperation towards the Government was declared. This was to include:

• 1.    Boycott of titles conferred by the Government,
• 2.    Boycott of civil services, army and police, i.e. all government jobs, and
• 3.    Non payment of taxes to the Government.

August 1st, 1920 was fixed as the date to start the movement. Gandhi insisted that unless the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs were undone, there was to be non-cooperation with the Government. However, for the success of this movement, Congress support was essential. Therefore, Gandhi’s efforts now were to make the Congress adopt the non-cooperation programme.

Towards non-cooperation

It was not an easy task for Gandhi to get the entire Congress to approve his programme of political action. According to Prof. Ravinder Kumar, “Gandhi made a concerted bid to convince Tilak of the virtues of Satyagraha and of the expediency of an alliance with the Muslim community over Khilafat”. However, Tilak was “skeptical of Satyagraha as an instrument of politics.” He was also not in favour of having an alliance “with Muslim leaders over a religious issue.” The basis of cooperation between Hindus and Muslims, argued Tilak, should be a secular one like the Lucknow Pact (1916). A lot depended on Tilak’s attitude whether hostile or neutral - but unfortunately he passed away on 1st August 1920. Lala Lajpat Rai and C.R. Das vehemently opposed the Gandhian idea of boycotting council elections. Jawaharlal Nehru wrote in his autobiography that “almost the entire old Guard of the Congress opposed Gandhi’s resolution of non-cooperation.”

The programme of non-cooperation and boycott was then placed before the Provincial Congress Committees (PCC) for their opinions. The PCC of the United Provinces after prolonged debate approved of the principle of non-cooperation, gradual boycott of government schools and colleges, government offices, British goods. But there were reservations about the boycott of the legislative councils.

The Bombay PCC, approved of non-cooperation as the legitimate method of agitation, but it objected to boycott of council and only recommended boycott of British goods as a first stage. The Bengal PCC agreed to accept the principle of non-cooperation but disagreed with the idea of council boycott. The Madras PCC approved the policies of non-cooperation but rejected Gandhi’s programme.

While this was the attitude of the ‘traditional’ bases of Indian politics to Gandhi’s programme, the comparatively ‘non-traditional’ areas in Indian politics like Gujarat and Bihar fully backed Gandhi’s programme. The Andhra and Punjab PCCs approved of non-cooperation but deferred a decision on Gandhi’s programme until the special Congress session. The dilemma of some of the provincial Congress leaders in supporting Gandhi’s programme was because of the future uncertainty of Gandhi’s movement and their unwillingness to boycott the council elections.

It was under these circumstances that a special session of the All India Congress Committee was held at Calcutta in September 1920. Lala Lajpat Rai was its president. A strong opposition to Gandhi’s programme was expected at this session. But contrary to the intentions of most established political leaders before the sessions began, Gandhi managed to get his proposals accepted at the open session of the Congress by the majority of 1000 vote.

Among Gandhi’s supporters were Motilal Nehru, Saifuddin Kitchlew, Jitendralal Benerjee, Shaukat Ali, Yakub Hassan and Dr. Ansari; while his opponents included Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya, Annie Besant, etc. Gandhi’s success came mainly because of the support from the business groups and the Muslims.

The Calcutta Congress approved a programme of:

1.    Surrender of titles,

2.    The boycott of schools, courts, foreign goods and councils, and

3.    Encouragement of national schools, arbitration courts and Khadi.

The Congress supported Gandhi’s plan for non-cooperation with Government till the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs were removed and Swaraj established. The final decision was left for the Nagpur session of the Congress to be held in December 1920. However, the precise nature of the Swaraj at which Gandhi aimed was not clear to contemporaries. Although Gandhi said that it was “Parliamentary Swaraj in accordance with the wishes of the people of India”, Jawaharlal Nehru admitted that it was a “vague Swaraj with no clear ideology behind it.”

In November 1920, following the reformed franchise, the council elections were held. All the Congress candidates boycotted the elections. Gandhi’s call for boycotting elections got massive response from different Indian provinces. This was an alarming sign for the British Government. Only 27.3 per cent of the Hindu voters and 12.1 per cent of the Muslim electorate participated in urban areas. In the rural areas 41.8 per cent of the Hindus and 28.3 per cent of the Muslims voted.

In the midst of lot of controversies and debates over the Gandhian programme, the Congress session started at Nagpur from 26 December 1920. The Nagpur Congress saw the dramatic change of C.R. Das of Bengal from a critic of Gandhi’s programme to the mover of the non-cooperation resolution at Nagpur. It endorsed the non-cooperation resolution which declared that the entire scheme, beginning with the renunciation of all voluntary association with the Government at one end and refusal to pay taxes at the other, should be put into force at a time to be decided by the Congress. Resignation from the councils, renunciation of legal practice, nationalization of education, economic boycott, organization of workers for national service, raising of a national fund and Hindu-Muslim unity were suggested as steps in the programme. The Nagpur session also brought a revolutionary change in the congress organization. The changes were:

1.    Formation of a working committee of 15 members,

2     formation of an All India Committee of 350 members,

3.    Formation of Congress Committees from town to village level,

4.    Reorganization of Provincial Congress Committees on a linguistic basis, and

5.    Opening of Congress membership to all men and women of the age of 21 or more on payment of 4 annas as annual subscription.

This was the first positive move on the part of the Congress to make it a real mass based political party. This period also witnessed a fundamental change in the social composition of the party as well as in its outlook and policies. Gandhi with a novel weapon of Satyagraha emerged as the mass leader in the Congress party.

From the above discussion it becomes clear that the programme of the Non-Cooperation Movement had to main aspects:

i)      Constructive and

ii)    Destructive

Under the first category came:

1.    The nationalization of education,

2.    The promotion of indigenous goods,

3.    The popularization of Charkha and Khadi, and

4.    The enrollment of a volunteer corps.

In the latter category figured the boycott of:

1.    Law courts,

2.    Educational institutions

3.    Elections to the legislature.

4.    Official functions,

5.    British goods as well as the surrender of honours and titles conferred by the British.

Phases of the non-cooperation movement

The campaign for non-cooperation and boycott started with great enthusiasm from early 1921. However, we find some changes in the central emphasis of the movement from one phase to other. In the first phase from January to March 1921, the main emphasis was on the boycott of schools, colleges, law courts; and the use of Charkha. There was widespread student unrest and top lawyers like C.R. Das and Motilal Nehru gave up their legal practice. This phase was followed by the second phase starting from April 1921. In this phase the basic objectives were the collection of Rs. one crore for the Tilak Swaraj Fund by August 1921, enrolling one crore Congress members and installing 20 lakh Charkhas by 30 June. In the third phase, starting from July, the stress was on boycott of foreign cloth, boycott of the forth coming visit of the Prince of Wales in November, 1921, popularisation of Charkha and Khadi and Jail Bharo by Congress volunteers.

In the last phase, in November 1921, a shift towards radicalism was visible. The Congress volunteers rallied the people and the country was on the verge of a revolt. Gandhi decided to launch a no revenue campaign at Bardoli, and also a mass civil disobedience movement for freedom of speech, press and association. But the attack on a local police station by angry peasants at Chauri Chaura, in Gorakhpur district of U.P. on 5th February 1922, changed the whole situation. Gandhi, shocked by this incident, withdrew the Non-Cooperation Movement.

People’s response to the movement

• The leadership of this movement in the initial stages came from the middle class. But the middle class had a lot of reservations about Gandhi’s programme. In places like Calcutta, Bombay and Madras which were centres of elite politicians, the response to Gandhi’s movement was very limited. Their response to the call for resignation from government service, surrendering of titles, etc. was not very encouraging. However, the economic boycott received support from the Indian business groups, because the textile industry had benefited from the nationalists emphasis on the use of Swadeshi. Still a section of the big business remained critical of the Non-Cooperation Movement. They were particularly afraid of labour unrest in the factories following the Non-Cooperation Movement.
• Besides the elite politicians, the comparative new comers in Indian politics found expression of their interests and aspirations in the Gandhian movement. Leaders like Rajendra Prasad in Bihar, Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel in Gujarat, provided solid support to Gandhian movement. In fact, they found non-cooperation as a viable political alternative to revolutionary terrorism in order to fight against a colonial government.
• The response from the students and women was very effective. Thousands of students left government schools and colleges and joined national schools and colleges. The newly started national institutions like the Kashi Vidyapeeth, the Gujarat Vidyapeeth and the Jamia Millia Islamia and others accommodated many students although several others were disappointed. Students became active volunteers of the movement. Women also came forward. They gave up Purdah and offered their jewellery for the Tilak Fund. They joined the movement in large members and took active part in picketing before the shops selling foreign cloth and liquor.
• The most important landmark of this movement was the massive participation of the peasants and workers in it. The long-standing grievances of the toiling masses against the British, as well as the Indian masters got an opportunity through this movement to express their real feelings. Although the Congress leadership was against class war, the masses broke this restraint. In rural areas and some other places, the peasants turned against the landlords and the traders. This gave a new dimension to the movement of 1921-22.

Spread of the movement, local variations

• The call for non-cooperation and boycott no doubt got massive response from different parts of India. The years 1921 and 1922 were marked by massive popular protests against the British Raj in India. However, the movement was shaped in most places according to local conditions. It was the local grievances of the people which found expression through this movement, and the instructions of the Congress leadership were not always followed. Let us take a brief look at different regions in relation to the Non-Cooperation Movement.
• Bengal: Mass participation in the Gandhian method of protest was less enthusiastic in Bengal. Rabindranath Tagore appreciated Gandhi for bringing to the masses a new consciousness. Elites of Calcutta were critical of some Gandhian ways. But, nevertheless, the non-cooperation movement brought about unique communal unity and awakening in the urban and rural masses. Hartals and mass courting of arrest greatly pressurized the British Government to change its attitude towards India.
• In the countryside, an intense propaganda was carried on and as a Government report said, “The things that are said and done in Gandhi’s name would make that gentleman shudder, if ever he heard of fraction of them.” The villagers in Midnapur district opposed the newly created Union Boards and the tax imposed by them. The people refused to pay taxes or agricultural rent to the Government or private landlords in the outlying districts of North Bengal.
• Bihar: In Bihar the local issue of the right to graze cattle on common government wastelands and the confrontation between the “lower and upper castes on the issue of the former taking the sacred thread got merged with the Non-Cooperation Movement. The issues of cow protection and the rights of Kisans were also focused upon. Because of this linkage, North Bihar, especially Champaran, Saran, Muzaffarpur and Purma districts, became the storm centres of the movement by November 1921. Hat (village market) looting and confrontation with the police became frequent.
• United Provinces: The United Provinces became a strong base of the Gandhian Non-Cooperation Movement. Organised non-cooperation was an affair of cities and small towns. In the countryside it took a different form. Here the movement got entangled with the Kisan movement. Despite the repeated appeal for non-violence from the congress leadership, the peasants rose in revolt not only against Talukdars but also, against merchants. Between January and March 1921 the districts of Rae Bareli, Pratapgarh, Faizabad and Sultanpur witnessed widespread agrarian riots under the leadership of Baba Ram Chandra. The major demands were no nazarana (extra premium on rent), no eviction from holdings, and no begar (forced labour) and rasad (forced supplies) etc.
• In late 1921 there was another strong peasant outburst which is known as the ‘Eka’ movement under a radical leader Madari Pasi. The basic demand here was the conversion of produce rents into cash. Another significant event was the destruction of thousands of acres of reserved forests in the Kumaon Division in July 1921 by the hill-tribes as they disliked the forest regulations.
• Punjab: In Punjab the response to this movement was not very remarkable in the city areas. But here the powerful Akali movement for reform and control of the Gurudwaras got closely identified with non-cooperation. Although Gandhi gave it only guarded approval, his non-cooperation tactic was consistently used by the Akalis. It showed a remarkable communal unity between the Sikhs, the Muslims and the Hindus.
• Maharashtra: In Maharashtra non-cooperation remained relatively week because the Tilakites were unenthusiastic about Gandhi, and Non-Brahmins felt that the Congress was a Chitpavan led affair. The higher castes disliked Gandhi’s emphasis on the elevation of the depressed classes and their participation in the Non-Cooperation Movement. However, there were some sporadic local outbursts. At Malegaon in Nasik district a few policemen were burnt to death following the arrest of some local leaders. In the Poona area some peasants tried to defend their landrights through Satyagraha.
• Assam: Non-Cooperation received massive support in the distant province of Assam. In the gardens of Assam the collies rose in revolt with shouts of “Gandhi Maharaj Ki Jai”; for higher wages and better condition of work. There were also signs of a non-revenue movement among peasants.
• Rajasthan: Peasant movements in the princely states of Rajasthan strengthened the Non-Cooperation Movement, as they did in Bihar and U.P. The peasants protested against cesses and begar. The Bijolia Movement in Mewar and the Bhil Movement under Motilal Tejawat acquired impetus from the Non-Cooperation Movement.
• Andhra: In Andhra the grievances of tribal and other peasants against forest laws got linked to the Non-Cooperation Movement. A large number of these people met Gandhi in Cudappa in September 1921 to get their taxes reduced and forest restrictions removed. Forest officials were boycotted. To assert their right they sent their cattle forcibly into the forests without paying the grazing tax. In the area on the periphery of forests, Swaraj was declared and police parties were attacked. Gandhi-Raj, the protesters believed, was about to come. A powerful movement for non-payment of land revenue also developed in Andhra between December 1921 and February 1922. The Non-Cooperation Movement attained great success in the Andhra delta area. In the same period Alluri Sitaram Raju organised the tribals in Andhra and combined their demands with those of the Non-Cooperation Movement.
• Karnataka: Karnataka areas remained comparatively unaffected by the movement and the initial response of the upper and middle class professional groups in several areas of the Madras presidency was limited. Out of 682 title holders only 6 returned their honours and 36 lawyers gave up their legal practice. In the entire presidency 92 national schools with 5,000 pupils were started. The labour in the Buckingham and Carnatie textile mills went on strike from July to October 1921. They were given moral support by the local Non-Cooperation leaders.

Similar responses were there in many other regions. For example in Orissa the tenants of the Kanika Raj refused to pay Abwabs. But in Gujarat the movement went on purely Gandhian lines.

The last phase

• The Government very carefully observed the developments and collected secret reports from the provinces about the progress of the movement. When the movement ultimately started, the Government took recourse to repression. The Congress and the Khilafat volunteer organizations were declared unlawful. Public assemblies and processions were banned. At many places the police fired on the satyagrahis. Arrests and Lathi charge became a common scene. By the end of 1921 all important leaders except Gandhi were imprisoned. Alarmed by Hindu-Muslim unity, the Government also tried to create a split between the Congress and the Khilafatists. Thus the Government machinery was fully geared to crush the movement.
• The repression by the British strengthened the determination of the Indians to continue the movement with greater vigour. Meanwhile the viceroy tried to negotiate with the Congress leaders through Madan Mohan Malaviya and offered to recognize the National volunteers and to release the political prisoners. In mid-January 1922 Gandhi explained the position of the Non-cooperation Movement at the All Parties Conference and there was a general agreement on his assessments. On 1st February he sent an ultimatum to the viceroy that he could start mass civil disobedience if the political prisoners were not released and repressive measures not abandoned. Since the whole country was not fit for civil disobedience he decided to launch it on 5th February. Congress volunteers were fired at by the police at Chauri Chaura in Gorakhpur district in U.P. In retaliation the infuriated mob killed 21 policemen. This violent incident shocked Gandhi and he suspended the Non-Cooperation movement. He also postponed the proposed civil disobedience at Bardoli. Many congressmen were shocked and surprised by Gandhi’s decision. They vehemently protested against it. Subhash Chandra Bose called it a “national calamity”. Jawaharlal Nehru expressed his “amazement and consternation” at the decision. Explaining his position Gandhi replied to Jawaharlal Nehru:
• “The movement had unconsciously drifted from the right path. We have come back to our moorings, and we can again go straight ahead.”
• On 12 February 1922 the Congress Working Committee meeting at Bordoli condemned the inhuman conduct of the mob at Chauri Chaura. It endorsed the suspension of the mass civil disobedience movement. The same day Gandhi started his five day fast as a penance. Thus, the first non-cooperation virtually came to an end. Gandhi was arrested on 10 March, 1922 and was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment.
• The Khilafat issues also lost its relevance when Kemal Pasha came to power in Turkey. The Sultan of Turkey was stripped of all political power. Kemal Pasha wanted to modernize Turkey and to make it a secular state. The Caliphate was abolished. Naturally it led to an end of Khilafat movement.

Causes of withdrawal

• Explaining the causes of withdrawal of the Non-Cooperation Movement, Gandhi said that the Chauri Chaura incident had forced him to withdraw the movement. The incident proved that the country still had not learnt the lesson from the non-violence. To quote Gandhi, “I would suffer every humiliation, every torture, absolute ostracism and death itself to prevent the movement from becoming violent.”
• As far as the peasants were concerned the Non-Cooperation Movement was gradually turning into a non-rent movement against the Zamindars. But the Congress leadership was in no way interested in attacking the legal rights of the Zamindars. Gandhi’s aim was of a “controlled mass movement” involving different Indian classes, and not a class revolution. So he was against the continuation of this movement which might turn into a class revolution. He made it quite clear that he was against any kind of violent or radical movement at that stage. In spite of an objective revolutionary situation existing in India there was no alternative revolutionary leadership. If the movement was not suspended it might have led to chaos because the leadership had no control over local movements.

Significance of the Non Cooperation Movement

• The Indian Nationalist movement, for the first time in history, acquired a real mass base with the participation of different sections of Indian society such as peasants, workers, students and teachers, women, merchants and so on. However, the big industrialist, capitalists and zamindars still remained hostile.
• Secondly, the movement witnesses the spread of nationalism to the remotest corners of the country.
• Thirdly, it transformed the Indian nationalist congress from a deliberative assembly into an organization for action, as evident from the various programmes of the movement. 
• Fourthly, it marked the height of Hindu – Muslim unity which could be seen in the merger of the Khilafat movement with this movement.
• Finally, the movement demonstrated to a remarkable degree the willingness and ability of the masses to endure hardships and make sacrifices in the cause of national independence.
• Thus, though the movement failed to achieve any of one of its three main demands, it was, nevertheless, a great step forward in the course of the Indian nationalist movement.