Modern India

Model Answer

Reasons Behind Gandhiji’s Choice of Salt as a Protest Symbol

Mahatma Gandhi selected salt as a symbol of protest during the Dandi Satyagraha for its universal significance in India and to strategically mobilize the masses. Salt was an essential item in every Indian household, regardless of caste, religion, or region, making it an ideal unifying factor. Yet, the British Salt Act of 1882 imposed a heavy tax on salt and restricted Indians from freely producing it from seawater. By targeting this oppressive policy, Gandhi was able to expose the unfair practices of British rule that affected the daily lives of all Indians (source: Dandi Satyagraha history). Additionally, salt was an essential commodity with which he could channel the people’s discontent against the British, whose monopoly on salt production generated 8.2% of their tax revenue. Gandhi’s approach aimed to disrupt this key economic stream, creating an unavoidable statement of dissent (source: Analysis on Salt Tax).

Impact of the Dandi March on the Indian National Movement

The Dandi March, beginning on March 12, 1930, marked a transformative period in India’s independence movement. Its impact extended to multiple fronts:

1. Regional Movements and Widespread Protests
   The Dandi Satyagraha inspired similar regional marches. Leaders like C. Rajagopalachari in Tamil Nadu, K. Kelappan in Malabar, and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan in the North-West Frontier Province organized marches to protest the salt tax. These protests were not limited to one region but spread to Assam and Andhra Pradesh, making salt production a powerful act of civil disobedience nationwide (source: Freedom Movement documentation).
2. Mass Participation
   Unlike previous protests, the Salt March witnessed mass involvement from peasants, workers, students, merchants, and shopkeepers, establishing Congress as a truly national movement. Women participated significantly, with leaders like Sarojini Naidu amplifying the movement’s reach (source: Congress archives).
3. Global Recognition and Pathway to Self-Governance
   International attention grew, with global publications like “Time” magazine covering the Dandi March and highlighting the plight of Indians. This exposure pressured the British into organizing Round Table Conferences, eventually leading to partial Indian representation in administration under the Government of India Act, of 1935, which paved the way toward complete independence (source: Time Magazine archives).

In essence, the Dandi Satyagraha symbolized the irreversibility of India’s push for independence, mobilizing both national and international support for Indian self-governance.

Model Answer

The First World War (1914-1918) caused significant socio-economic disruptions in India, which contributed to the rise of mass mobilization for the independence movement. Some of the key disruptions included:

1. Economic Hardships

• Rise in National Debt: To fund the war, the British government significantly increased defense expenditure, leading to a rise in national debt by over Rs. 3 million between 1914 and 1923. This debt burden was passed on to the common people through heavy war loans and increased taxes. This economic strain was compounded by the rise in prices, leading to widespread hardship for the Indian populace.
• Food Shortages and Famine: The export of food grains to support the war effort, along with crop failures in 1918-19, led to food shortages and famine. The underproduction of crops during this period disproportionately affected vulnerable groups, such as women and children.

2. Distress Among Peasants and Workers

• Farmer Distress: Rising prices of industrial goods and food crops during the war were not matched by a corresponding increase in the prices of Indian agricultural raw materials. This led to severe distress among farmers, sparking protests like the Kisan Sabha movement in Uttar Pradesh (1918).
• Working-Class Discontent: Low wages, long working hours, and harsh working conditions, compounded by the demand for overtime to increase war production, led to widespread dissatisfaction among industrial workers.

3. Spread of Pandemic

• The return of Indian soldiers from the front lines in Europe facilitated the spread of the Spanish Flu (1918-1919), which claimed millions of lives and overwhelmed India’s already strained healthcare system.

Contribution to Mass Mobilization for Independence

The socio-economic impact of WW-I fueled the Indian independence struggle in several ways:

1. Political Awareness

Indian soldiers who fought in the war returned with heightened political awareness and a sense of injustice about colonial rule. This sense of empowerment contributed to the spread of nationalist ideas.

2. The Home Rule Movement

In response to the hardships caused by WW-I, the Home Rule Movement, led by leaders like Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Annie Besant, gained momentum. It called for self-governance and rallied public opinion against British policies.

3. Repressive British Policies

The British response to growing discontent included the imposition of martial law and the Rowlatt Act (1919), which restricted civil liberties. These oppressive measures further united Indian society, leading to Gandhiji’s Rowlatt Satyagraha.

4. The Khilafat-Non-Cooperation Movement

The harsh post-war Treaty of Sevres and the treatment of the Turkish Sultan (Khalifa) sparked the Khilafat Movement. Gandhiji’s Non-Cooperation Movement, which combined the Khilafat cause with the broader nationalist struggle, mobilized peasants, workers, and women.

Thus, the socio-economic disruptions caused by the war, alongside oppressive British policies, led to mass mobilization across various sections of Indian society for the independence movement.

Model Answer

Introduction

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre of April 13, 1919, marked a critical juncture in India’s fight for independence. British troops, under General Reginald Dyer, killed hundreds of unarmed Indian civilians protesting British oppression. This brutal act not only heightened tensions within India but also attracted global attention, significantly influencing both domestic and international politics.

Domestic Impact of the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

The massacre galvanized India’s political landscape. It became a powerful rallying cry for Indian leaders, leading to the emergence of Mahatma Gandhi as a key figure in the independence movement. The massacre intensified the push for Indian self-rule, sparking the Non-Cooperation Movement in 1920, which united Hindus and Muslims in their opposition to British colonialism.

Relations between the British and Indians soured dramatically after the massacre. The Indian public lost trust in British authorities, and anti-British sentiments surged across the nation. The massacre also deepened religious and communal divides, particularly among the Sikh community, many of whom were victims, leading to feelings of betrayal, as they had previously been loyal to the British.

Additionally, many soldiers who had previously served in the British Indian Army protested the massacre by resigning or refusing to reenlist, demonstrating the growing disillusionment with British rule.

International Impact of the Jallianwala Bagh Massacre

Globally, the massacre attracted widespread condemnation. International media outlets denounced the British for their actions, portraying them as an example of colonial brutality. This criticism not only tarnished Britain’s image but also fueled anti-colonial sentiment worldwide.

The incident also led to diplomatic tensions, particularly with the United States and Canada, who criticized Britain’s treatment of Indians. Moreover, it inspired nationalist movements in other colonized countries and contributed to the larger decolonization process.

Conclusion

The Jallianwala Bagh massacre was a transformative event in India’s struggle for independence. It galvanized domestic resistance, united diverse groups against British rule, and attracted global attention to the injustices of colonialism. It remains a significant moment in both Indian and global history, symbolizing the brutality of imperialism and the unyielding desire for self-determination.