Det danske Fredsakademi
Kronologi over fredssagen og international politik 8. August
1942 / Timeline August 8, 1942
Version 3.5
7. August 1942, 9. August 1942
08/08/1942
Antiimperialisme, Indien
Mohandas Gandhi rundsender Quit India-resolutionen.
Kilde: Text issued by the Government of India of the
original "Quit India" Resolution drafted by Mohandas K. Gandhi and
rejected by the All-India Congress Working Committee in favor of
the modified version submitted by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru
The Gandhi Draft Was Presented to the Committee on April 27,
1942
New York Times, August 5, 1942.
Whereas the British War Cabinet proposals by Sir Stafford Cripps
have shown up British imperialism in its nakedness as never before,
the All-India Congress Committee has come to the following
conclusions:
The committee is of the opinion that Britain is incapable of
defending India. It is natural that whatever she does is for her
own defense. There is the eternal conflict between Indian and
British interest. It follows that their notions of defense would
also differ.
The British Government has no trust in India's political parties.
The Indian Army has been maintained up till now mainly to hold
India in subjugation. It has been completely segregated from the
general population, who can in no sense regard it as their own.
This policy of mistrust still continues, and is the reason why
national defense is not entrusted to India's elected
representatives.
Japan's quarrel is not with India. She is warring against the
British Empire. India's participation in the war has not been with
the consent of the representatives of the Indian people. It was
purely a British act. If India were freed, her first step would
probably be to negotiate with Japan.
The Congress is of the opinion that if the British withdrew from
India, India would be able to defend herself in the event of the
Japanese, or any aggressor, attacking India.
The committee is, therefore, of the opinion that the British should
withdraw from India. The plea that they should remain in India for
the protection of the Indian princes is wholly untenable. It is an
additional proof of their determination to maintain their hold over
India. The princes need have no fear from an unarmed India.
The question of majority and minority is the creation of the
British Government, and would disappear on their withdrawal.
For all these reasons, the committee appeals to Britain, for the
sake of her own safety, for the sake of India's safety and for the
cause of world peace, to let go her hold on India, even if she does
not give up all her Asiatic and African possessions.
This committee desires to assure the Japanese Government and people
that India bears no enmity, either toward Japan or toward any other
nation. India only desires freedom from all alien domination. But
in this fight for freedom the committee is of the opinion that
India, while welcoming universal sympathy, does not stand in need
of foreign military aid.
India will attain her freedom through her non-violent strength, and
will retain it likewise. Therefore, the committee hopes that Japan
will not have any designs on India. But if Japan attacks India, and
Britain makes no response to its appeal, the committee will expect
all those who look to the Congress for guidance to offer complete
non-violent non-cooperation to the Japanese forces, and not to
render any assistance to them. It is no part of the duty of those
who are attacked to render any assistance to the attacker. It is
their duty to offer complete non-cooperation.
It is not difficult to understand the simple principle of
nonviolent non-cooperation:
First, we may not bend the knee to an aggressor, or obey any of his
orders.
Second, we may not look to him for any favors nor fall to his
bribes, but we may not bear him any malice nor wish him ill.
Third, if he wishes to take possession of our fields we will refuse
to give them up, even if we have to die in an effort to resist
him.
Fourth, if he is attacked by disease, or is dying of thirst and
seeks our aid, we may not refuse it.
Fifth, in such places where British and Japanese forces are
fighting, our non-cooperation will be fruitless and
unnecessary.
At present, our non-cooperation with the British Government is
limited. Were we to offer them complete non-cooperation when they
are actually fighting, it would be tantamount to bringing our
country deliberately into Japanese hands. Therefore, not to put any
obstacle in the way of the British forces will often be the only
way of demonstrating our non-cooperation with the Japanese.
Neither may we assist the British in any active manner. If we can
judge from their recent attitude, the British Government do not
need any help from us beyond our non-interference. They desire our
help only as slaves.
It is not necessary for the committee to make a clear declaration
in regard to a scorched-earth policy. If, in spite of our
nonviolence, any part of the country falls into Japanese hands, we
may not destroy our crops or water supply, etc., if only because it
will be our endeavor to regain them. The destruction of war
material is another matter, and may, under certain circumstances,
be a military necessity. But it can never be the Congress policy to
destroy what belongs, or is of use, to the masses.
Whilst non-cooperation against the Japanese forces will necessarily
be limited to a comparatively small number, and must succeed if it
is complete and genuine, true building up of swaraj
[self-government] consists in the millions of India wholeheartedly
working for a constructive program. Without it, the whole nation
cannot rise from its age-long torpor.
Whether the British remain or not, it is our duty always to wipe
out our unemployment, to bridge the gulf between the rich and the
poor, to banish communal strife, to exorcise the demon of
untouchability, to reform the Dacoits [armed bandits] and save the
people from them. If scores of people do not take a living interest
in this nation-building work, freedom must remain a dream and
unattainable by either non-violence or violence.
Foreign soldiers: The committee is of the opinion that it is
harmful to India's interests, and dangerous to the cause of India's
freedom, to introduce foreign soldiers in India. It therefore
appeals to the British Government to remove these foreign legions,
and henceforth stop further introduction. It is a crying shame to
bring foreign troops in, in spite of India's inexhaustible man
power, and it is proof of the immorality that British imperialism
is.
08/09/1942
Top
Send
kommentar, email
eller søg i Fredsakademiet.dk
|