KHILAFAT AND NON-COOPERATION MOVEMENT Study Materials

Khilafat and Non Cooperation

KHILAFAT AND NON-COOPERATION

We will explore the Khilafat Question post the dismemberment of Turkey and the subsequent Non-Cooperation/Khilafat Movement. We will examine various aspects of the Khilafat question, the spread of the revolt and the Chauri Chaura incident, leading to the withdrawal of NCM in response by Gandhiji. The Khilafat and Non-cooperation movements initiated a new era of mass mobilisation and radically shaped the future of Indian polity. Though the two movements emerged from separate issues, they adopted a common programme of action—that of non-violent non- cooperation. The Khilafat issue was not directly linked to Indian politics but it provided the immediate background to the movement and gave an added advantage of cementing Hindu-Muslim unity against the British.

Background

The background to the two movements was provided by a series of events after the First World War which belied all hopes of the government’s generosity towards the Indian subjects. The year 1919 saw a strong feeling of discontent among all sections of Indians for various reasons:

The economic situation of the country in the post-War years had become alarming with a rise in prices of commodities, decrease in production of Indian industries, increase in burden of taxes and rents etc. Almost all sections of society suffered economic hardship due to the war and this strengthened the anti-British attitude.

The Rowlatt Act, the imposition of martial law in Punjab and the Jallianwala Bagh massacre exposed the brutal and uncivilized face of the foreign rule.

The Hunter Committee on the Punjab atrocities proved to be an eyewash. In fact, the House of Lords (of the British Parliament) endorsed General Dyer’s action and the British public showed solidarity with General Dyer by helping The Morning Post collect 30,000 pounds for him.

The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms with their ill- conceived scheme of dyarchy failed to satisfy the rising demand of the Indians for self-government.

The post-First World War period also saw the preparation of the ground for common political action by Hindus and Muslims— ➤ The Lucknow Pact (1916) had stimulated Congress-Muslim League cooperation ➤ The Rowlatt Act agitation brought Hindus and Muslims, and also other sections of the society, together ➤ Radical nationalist Muslims like Mohammad Ali, Abul Kalam Azad, Hakim Ajmal Khan and Hasan Imam had now become more influential than the conservative Aligarh school elements who had dominated the League earlier.

The younger elements advocated militant nationalism and active participation in the nationalist movement. They had strong anti-imperialist sentiments. In this atmosphere the Khilafat issue emerged, around which developed the historic Non-Cooperation Movement.

BEGINNING OF THE KHILAFAT MOVEMENT

The Khilafat movement in India arose out of the sentiments of the Indian Muslims to protect the institution of the Khalifa in Turkey.

The Khalifa in Islamic tradition was considered as the successor to the Prophet Muhammad, the commander of the believers and the custodian and protector of the Muslim holy places.

In the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Empire was the only Islamic empire and, therefore, the Sultan of Turkey was held in great esteem by the Indian Muslims as the Khalifa.

Turkey was part of the Axis powers along with Germany and Austria which fought against Britain and its allies. After its victory in the War, the British government removed the Khalifa from power in Turkey. There were also talks about imposition of a harsh peace treaty on Turkey which would deprive it of territories and influence.

Under these circumstances, a widespread movement among the Indian Muslims developed which demanded that the Khalifa must retain control over the Muslim holy places and that sufficient territories must be left with the Khalifa to enable him to defend the holy places.

This movement known as the Khilafat movement quickly spread among the elite as well as among the urban

popular classes and the ulama or the Muslim religious scholars.

The British government was declared an enemy, Khilafat funds were flooded with money and ornaments, the Khilafat meetings were attended by thousands of people, and thousands from the border areas migrated from the land of enemy (Dar al-Harb) to the land of Islam (Dar al-Islam).

The movement derived its leadership from two streams, both involved in educational reforms for the Muslims in the wake of colonial rule.

One was the Aligarh-based Westernizing intelligentsia which advocated English education and canvassed for employment in government services.

The other was Ulama who attempted to strengthen the traditional Islamic system of education based on Madrasas and were opposed to English education and Western manners.

While the Western-educated leadership generally sought moderation, the ulama provided a radical edge to the movement.

In order to properly organise the movement, the leadership established two All- India bodies – the All-India Khilafat Committee and the Jamiat al-Ulama-e-Hind. The earlier Muslim political organisation – Muslim League – was completely overshadowed by these two organisations until the mid-1920s.

In early 1919, a Khilafat Committee was formed under the leadership of the Ali brothers (Shaukat Ali and Muhammad Ali), Maulana Azad, Ajmal Khan and Hasrat Mohani, to force the British government to change its attitude towards Turkey.

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”.

Congress Stand on Khilafat Question

The Khilafat issue was not directly linked with politics in India but the Khilafat leaders were eager in enlisting the support of Hindus. 

Gandhiji was in favour of launching satyagraha and non-cooperation against the government on the Khilafat issue, the Congress was not united on this form of political action.

Tilak was opposed to having an alliance with Muslim leaders over a religious issue and he was also sceptical of satyagraha as an instrument of politics.

There was opposition to some of the other provisions of the Gandhiji’s non-cooperation programme also, such as boycott of councils.

Later, however, Gandhiji was able to the get the approval of the Congress for his programme of political action and the Congress felt inclined to support a non-cooperation programme on the Khilafat question because— ➤ it was felt that this was a golden opportunity to cement Hindu-Muslim unity and to bring Muslim masses into the national movement ➤ the Congress was losing faith in constitutional struggle, especially after the Punjab incidents and the blatantly partisan Hunter Committee Report ➤ the Congress was aware that the masses were eager to give expression to their discontent.

Muslim League Support to Congress- The Muslim League also decided to give full support to the Congress and its agitation on political questions.

Convergence of the Two Movements under Gandhiji’s Leadership

The anti-Rowlatt agitation and the Khilafat movement were two widespread mobilisations after the War which were directed against the colonial government, and Gandhiji played a major role in both of these.

It may be said that it was his leadership that made the convergence of the two anti-imperialist streams – nationalist and the Khilafat possible during this period.

The Khilafat leaders were very keen right from the beginning to get the support of the Hindus for their cause. In this effort, they found Gandhiji as their staunchest ally. He further tried to join the nationalist demand for self-rule to the Muslim assertion over Khilafat question.

An All-India Khilafat Conference was organised in Delhi on 23-24 November 1919 in which Gandhiji was also called.

The Conference passed some important resolutions in case unjust treatment was meted out to Turkey during the peace settlement: boycott of peace celebrations by Muslims, non-cooperation with the government, and boycott of British goods.

Gandhiji was declared to be the leader under whose guidance the movement would be carried forward and who commanded the respect of both the Hindus and the Muslims.

Gandhiji himself wanted all-round support for his nationalist cause and, therefore, he was not averse to the idea of bringing the two movements together.

Early in 1920, he declared that the Khilafat issue was more important than constitutional reforms and even the Punjab atrocities and he was prepared to launch a movement of non-cooperation if the peace terms were antagonistic to the interests of Turkey. Besides this, other issues necessitating a wider movement were also present.

The terms of the Peace Treaty, which became public in May 1920, were a blow to the wishes of the Khilafat leaders. The Ottoman Empire controlled by the Turks was dismembered.

Both Gandhiji and the Khilafat leaders were keen to start the non-cooperation movement as soon as possible. Gandhiji and Shaukat Ali together toured throughout the country mobilising support for the cause of non- cooperation.

Other Khilafat leaders were also active in rallying support for the cause under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. Thus, it may be said that during the summer of the 1920, there was a convergence of these two movements.

Main Phases

The non-cooperation movement was formally launched on 1 August 1920. That day was also marked by the death of Bal Gangadhar Tilak.

In September 1920 at a special session in Calcutta, the Congress approved a non-cooperation programme till the Punjab and Khilafat wrongs were removed and swaraj was established. The programme was to include- ➤ boycott of government schools and colleges and decided to set up national schools and colleges; ➤ boycott of law courts and dispensation of justice through panchayats instead; ➤ boycott of legislative councils; (there were some differences over this as some leaders like C.R. Das were not willing to include a boycott of councils, but bowed to Congress discipline; these leaders boycotted elections held in November 1920 and the majority of the voters too stayed away); ➤ boycott of foreign cloth and use of khadi instead; also practice of hand-spinning to be done; ➤ renunciation of government honours and titles; the second phase could include mass civil disobedience including resignation from government service, and non-payment of taxes; ➤ condemnation and renunciation of untouchability, maintenance of communal amity and strict observance of non-violence. ➤ By the time of the regular Congress Session in December 1920 held at Nagpur, the programme of non-cooperation was accepted without opposition. ➤ An important change was made in the Congress creed: now, instead of having the attainment of self-government through constitutional means as its goal, the Congress decided to have the attainment of swaraj through peaceful and legitimate means, thus committing itself to an extra- constitutional mass struggle. ➤ Some important organisational changes were made: a congress working committee (CWC) of 15 members was set up to lead the Congress from now onwards; provincial congress committees on linguistic basis were organised; ward committees were organised; and entry fee was reduced to four annas.

At this stage, some leaders like Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Annie Besant, G.S. Kharpade and B.C. Pal left the Congress as they believed in a constitutional and lawful struggle while some others like Surendranath Banerjea founded the Indian National Liberal Federation and played a minor role in national politics henceforward. First Phase

From January to March 1921, the main emphasis of the movement was on the boycott of government schools, colleges and law courts, and the use of charkha.

Thousands of students left schools and colleges and joined 800 national schools and colleges that had come up throughout the country. There were massive student strikes in Calcutta and Lahore, and the educational boycott was particularly successful in Bengal and Punjab.

Although the boycott of the law courts was not as successful, many leading lawyers of the country like C.R. Das, Motilal Nehru, Saifuddin Kitchlew, C. Rajagopalachari, M.R. Jayakar, Vallabhbhai Patel, Asaf Ali and T. Prakasham quit their practice.

Educational institutions like Jamia Millia at Aligarh, Kashi Vidyapeeth, Gujarat Vidyapeeth and Bihar Vidyapeeth were established during this period. 

The boycott of foreign cloth became a very successful programme. The foreign- made clothes were collected and set on fire. There was also picketing of shops selling foreign cloth. The impact of this was enormous. The value of import of such merchandise fell from Rs. 102 crores in 1920-21 to Rs. 57 crores in 1921-22. Second Phase

The next phase of the movement may be said to have started from the Vijayawada session of the Congress held in March 1921.

It was decided to concentrate in the next three months on enrolling one crore members for the party, collecting one crore rupees for the Tilak Swaraj Fund and distributing and installing 20 lakh charkhas.

This phase also achieved its objectives to a large extent: Tilak fund was oversubscribed, 50 lakh members were enrolled and charkhas were widely popularised and khadi became the dress of the movement. Third Phase

The third phase of the movement witnessed its high points in the challenging speech by Mohammed Ali in July 1921 declaring it ‘religiously unlawful for the Muslims to continue in the British Army’ and asking them to resign and in the successful boycott of the visit of the Prince of Wales in November 1921.

Another important nationalist campaign during this phase was against the visit by the Prince of Wales. As soon as he landed in Bombay on 17 November, he was greeted with city-wide strikes and demonstrations which sometimes culminated in riots. Fourth Phase

In the fourth phase, both the non-cooperators and the government appeared in a confrontationist mood.

Khilafat leaders like Hasrat Mohani were in favour of demanding complete independence from the British rule.

At the ground level the Congress was influential among a very large number of people and its Volunteer Corps became almost a parallel police force.

The Congress had sanctioned its provincial committees to start a civil disobedience movement wherever it was felt necessary.

The government, on the other hand, had started using repression as its official policy. The Congress and the Khilafat volunteer organizations were declared unlawful. Public assemblies and processions were banned. Arrests and lathi charge became a common scene.

Gandhiji was now under increasing pressure from the Congress rank and file to start the civil disobedience programme. The Ahmedabad session in 1921 appointed Gandhiji the sole authority on the issue.

On February 1, 1922 Gandhiji threatened to launch civil disobedience from Bardoli (Gujarat) if (i) political prisoners were not released, and (ii) press controls were not removed. The movement had hardly begun before it was brought to an abrupt end.

CHAURI-CHAURA INCIDENT

On 5 February 1922, in Chauri-Chaura in Gorakhpur district the police provoked a crowd of demonstrators. The people attacked the policemen who then fired on them. Angered by this the people set fire to the police station building in which many policemen died. When Gandhiji heard this violent incident, he decided to withdraw the movement which was later ratified by the Congress Working Committee.

The Congress Working Committee met at Bardoli in February 1922 and resolved to stop all activity that led to breaking of the law and to get down to constructive work, instead, which was to include popularisation of khadi, national schools, and campaigning for temperance, for Hindu-Muslim unity and against untouchability.

Most of the nationalist leaders including C.R.Das, Motilal Nehru, Subhash Bose, Jawaharlal Nehru, however, expressed their bewilderment at Gandhiji’s decision to withdraw the movement. In March 1922, Gandhiji was arrested and sentenced to six years in jail.

Why Gandhiji Withdrew the Movement?

Gandhiji felt that people had not learnt or fully understood the method of non-violence. Incidents like Chauri-Chaura could lead to the kind of excitement and fervour that would turn the movement to become generally violent.

A violent movement could be swiftly suppressed by the colonial authorities, who would use any violent incidents as justification to deploy state armed forces against the protesters.

The movement began to lose momentum, which was expected since sustaining high-intensity protests for extended periods is challenging. Meanwhile, the government showed no willingness to negotiate.

The primary focus of the agitation, the Khilafat issue faded away. In November 1922, Mustafa Kemal Pasha led a movement in Turkey that stripped the Sultan of political power and established a secular state, rendering the Khilafat question irrelevant.

SPREAD OF THE MOVEMENT AND LOCAL VARIATIONS  Bengal

Mass participation in the Gandhian method of protest was less enthusiastic in Bengal.

Elites of Calcutta were critical of some Gandhian ways. But the non-cooperation movement nevertheless brought about unique communal unity and awakening in the urban and rural masses.

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.

United Province

The United Provinces became a strong base of the Gandhian Non-Cooperation Movement. 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 Talukdara but also, against merchants. 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.

Punjab

In Punjab the response to this movement was not very remarkable in the city areas.

The powerful Akali movement for reform and control of the Gurudwaras got closely identified with non-cooperation.

Maharashtra

In Maharashtra non-cooperation remained relatively weak because the Tilakites were unenthusiastic about Gandhiji.

The higher castes disliked Gandhiji’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 Nashik 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 land rights though Satyagraha.

Assam

Non-Cooperation received massive support in the distant province of Assam.

Strikes in tea plantations, steamer services and Assam-Bengal Railways had been organised. J.M. Sengupta was a prominent leader in these strikes.

Rajasthan

Peasant movements in the princely states of Rajasthan strengthened the Non- cooperation Movement.

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 region

In Andhra the grievances of tribal and other peasants against forest laws got linked to the Non-Cooperation Movement.

A powerful movement for non-payment of land revenue developed in Andhra between December 1921 and February 1922.

In the same period Alluri Sitaram Raju organised the tribals in Andhra and combined their demands with those of the Non-Cooperation Movement.

Karnataka

The Karnataka region was relatively untouched by the movement, and the initial participation of upper- and middle-class professionals in various parts of the Madras Presidency was minimal.

Workers at the Buckingham and Carnatic textile mills staged a strike from July to October 1921, receiving moral backing from local Non-Cooperation leaders.

PEOPLE’S RESPONSE Middle Class

The leadership of this movement in the initial stages came from the middle class. But the middle class had a lot of reservations about Gandhiji’s programme. In places like Calcutta, Bombay, Madras which were centres of elite politicians, the response to Gandhiji’s movement was very limited.

Their response to the call for resignation from government service, surrendering of titles, etc. was not very encouraging.

Business Class

The economic boycott received support from the Indian business group, because the textile industry had benefited from the nationalist’s 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.

Students and Women

The response from the students and women was very effective.

Thousands of students left government schools and colleges and joined national schools and colleges.

Women also came forward. They gave up Purdah and offered their jewellery for the Tilak Fund.

They joined the movement in large numbers and took active part in picketing before the shops selling foreign cloth and liquor.

Peasants and Workers

The most important landmark of this movement was the massive participation of the peasants and workers in it.

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.

Contribution of the movements in anti-imperialist struggles

The Khilafat and non-cooperation movements played an extremely important role in generating and spreading anti-imperialist consciousness among Indian people.

There was a remarkable unity between various communities. The Hindus and Muslims together participated in the movement throughout the country and often it was difficult to distinguish between non-cooperation and Khilafat meetings.

Another important issue which the non-cooperation movement brought to the fore was the need to fight against caste discrimination and untouchability.

Strong anti-colonial movements were afoot among various sections of the population. Peasants and workers were particularly active during this period, besides the middle classes in both the urban and rural areas. Several peasant and worker movements occurred during this period.