INDIA SINCE CRIPPS
Sra,—May I reply briefly to Mr Alexander? As regards his first point, I can only quote page 19 of his book, where he says " It was a bitter thing for India's leaders to feel that at this climax of history, they were denied the direction of a great nation's destiny." So, too, on pages 39-4o, " it must be turned into a people's war if the Japanese were to be resisted. How? By seizing the Government." There is much more to this effect.
As regards his second point, I Cannot find any passage in which he warns India of the danger of " monkeying about with politics," to use Professor Hill's phrase, with starvation staring her in the face. " We want power," said Mr. Kerpilani, General Secretary of the Congress, " in order that we may fight out our quarrel with the Muslims." Gandhi has expressed his opinion that Indians .would " fight like dogs." Is this to be a " non-violent " dog-fight? I myself witnessed the demoralisation caused by Gandhi's Civil Disobedience movement in Bombay Presidency in 1930. What would be the result of civil war is almost too horrible to imagine. •
As regards Mr. Alexander's third point, I must plead inability to grasp the difference between " negotiating " with Japan and coming to terms with her. Gandhi has expressed his sympathy with Japanese aspirations, and has blamed America for going to war with her. Nor can I see how the " stubborn non-violent resistance " of millions of Indians would exercise any deterrent effect upon, the Japanese in China. I have endeavoured not to misrepresent the Mahatma, but his bewildering inconsistencies make the task a difficult one. I am not the only person to be completely disillusioned since 1940.—Yours faithfully,
H. G. RAWLINSON.
Previous page
