Political mobilisation in the princely states of India evolved during the early 20th century. This period was marked by a growing awareness of democratic rights and civil liberties. The national movement in British India influenced the political landscape of the princely states, prompting local organisations to seek reforms and representation.
Stages of Political Mobilisation
Political mobilisation in the princely states can be divided into three distinct stages:
- Initial Stage (1918-1920): Focused on local grievances like employment of ‘foreigners’ in administration and restrictions on civil liberties.
- Confrontation Stage (Late 1920s-1930s): Characterised by public protests and demands for greater representation and political rights.
- Peasant Mobilisation (1940s): Emergence of peasant movements alongside urban middle-class activism, pushing for broader political reforms.
Initial Stage – Local Grievances
The initial phase of political mobilisation concentrated on specific local issues. People protested against the employment of outsiders in state administration. They demanded civil liberties, including freedom of the press and assembly. Early agitators sought increased recruitment of local subjects in government jobs and the establishment of representative assemblies.
Confrontation Stage – Public Protests
By the late 1920s, political agitation escalated. The educated urban middle class began to organise street demonstrations. The key demands shifted towards popular representation and the legal right to form political associations. Protesters also called for privy purses to limit rulers’ discretionary spending and increased funding for social infrastructure, particularly in education and health.
Peasant Mobilisation – 1940s
In the 1940s, peasant movements gained prominence. These movements ran parallel to urban activism. Political leaders aimed to broaden their support base and coordinate with political bodies in British India. Mobilisation efforts intensified, focusing on land reforms and social justice.
Growth of Political Consciousness
The rise of political consciousness was influenced by British policies, particularly the “divide and rule” strategy. The Non-Cooperation and Khilafat Movements of 1920 catalysed local organisations in princely states. Notable early organisations emerged in Baroda, Kathiawar, Mysore, and Hyderabad.
Formation of All-India States People’s Conference
In December 1927, the All-India States People’s Conference (AISPC) was established. It aimed to unify the various state movements and advocate for reforms. The conference attracted 700 delegates from across India. Its goals included promoting popular representation and self-government.
Role of the Indian National Congress
Initially, the Indian National Congress adopted a non-interference policy regarding princely states. The Congress faced resource constraints and aimed to avoid conflict on multiple fronts. However, it supported constructive work, such as anti-untouchability campaigns.
Congress Resolutions and Policies
In 1920, the Congress passed a resolution urging princes to grant responsible government. It allowed state subjects to join the Congress but restricted their political activities in the states. The Congress encouraged local organisations to develop independently.
Changing Dynamics in the 1930s
The 1930s saw changes. The Government of India Act (1935) proposed a federation including princely states, though it was undemocratic. Congress’s success in British India in 1937 inspired political participation in the states. Radical leaders like Nehru and Bose pushed for a more aggressive stance towards princely states.
Shift in Congress Strategy
At the Tripuri Session in 1939, Congress removed restrictions on its activities in princely states. Nehru’s election as president of the AISPC symbolised the merging of movements. The Congress embraced the struggle against oppressive princely rule as part of the broader nationalist movement.
Quit India Movement
The Quit India Movement in 1942 marked a turning point. The Congress extended its call for independence to the princely states. This integration of state subjects into the independence struggle was crucial for mobilising support against colonial rule.
Challenges Post-Independence
As British rule ended, the future of princely states became a pressing issue. Many princes sought to claim independence. The national leadership, particularly Sardar Patel, navigated this complex situation. Patel’s diplomatic skills and pragmatic approach facilitated the integration of over 500 princely states into the Indian Union.
Negotiations and Instruments of Accession
On June 27, 1947, Sardar Patel became the minister in charge of the States Department. He, along with V.P. Menon, negotiated with the princes. They drafted the Instrument of Accession, which the princes signed to transfer control of defence, foreign affairs, and communications to the Government of India.
Methods of Integration
Patel employed various strategies to persuade princes to join India. He appealed to their patriotism and warned of potential anarchy if they resisted. The concept of ‘privy purses’ was introduced as compensation for the princes’ agreement to integrate.
Use of Force and Popular Movements
In some cases, Patel resorted to force. For instance, in Orissa, he used military pressure to ensure compliance. Many princes eventually signed the Instruments of Accession due to a combination of diplomatic efforts, popular movements, and the realisation that independence was not viable.
Case Studies – Hyderabad and Jammu & Kashmir
Hyderabad presented a unique challenge. The Nizam resisted integration, leading to violent protests. The Indian Army intervened in 1948, marking the end of his rule. Similarly, Hari Singh, the Maharaja of Jammu & Kashmir, delayed accession until faced with external threats. He signed the Instrument of Accession on October 26, 1947, formalising Jammu & Kashmir’s integration into India.
