State the implications of 1st world war on India's freedom struggle.
Answers
Answered by
0
'Almost 1.5 million Muslim, Sikh and Hindu men volunteered in the Indian Expeditionary Force.' Photo of members of a Waziri Khasadar, India, 1917-19 ©
Imperial War Museum.
The First World War had lasting consequences that extended far beyond Europe. It set in motion forces that developed into India’s independence movement. Anne Bostanci, co-author of the British Council report, Remember the World as well as the War, ponders a promising emerging shift in the UK’s discussions about the First World War.
The UK’s history must include the stories of people from the former British Empire
The UK has a particular responsibility to construct an inclusive history of the experience of the First World War. It was a truly global conflict, and involved many Commonwealth countries that made huge sacrifices vital to Britain’s war effort.
However, as the British Council’s recent international survey — carried out in Egypt, France, Germany, India, Russia, Turkey and the UK — showed, the UK public has only a limited understanding of the extent and significance of the role of Commonwealth countries in the First World War, and is therefore some way away from recognising them appropriately.
Take the example of India
India made a huge contribution to Britain’s war effort. It sent staggering numbers of volunteers to fight and die on behalf of the allied forces. Almost 1.5 million Muslim, Sikh and Hindu men from regions such as the Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar volunteered in the Indian Expeditionary Force , which saw fighting on the Western Front, in East Africa, Mesopotamia, Egypt and Gallipoli. Volunteering offered a chance to break through the caste system, because becoming a soldier paid well and meant becoming part of the ‘warrior’ caste, which gave high status. However, of these men, around 50,000 died, 65,000 were wounded, and 10,000 were reported missing, while 98 Indian army nurses were killed. The country also supplied 170,000 animals, 3,7 million tonnes of supplies, jute for sandbags, and a large loan (the equivalent of about £2 billion today) to the British government.
But do the UK and India remember India’s role?
While the UK is one of the top ten unprompted associations with the First World War held by Indian survey respondents, India was not mentioned a single time as a top-of-mind association with the First World War among the 1,215 UK survey respondents. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that twice as many respondents in India compared to the UK feel that their country’s role in the First World War is — to this day — often misrepresented and misunderstood in global history (almost one quarter of Indian respondents indicated this).
At the same time, around three quarters of respondents in India as well as in the UK felt that their country is still affected by the consequences of the First World War.
Were Britain and India on the same side or fighting each other?
Looking for reasons why the First World War still looms large amongst people in India, it becomes clear that that period of history is inextricably bound up with the history of the independence movement. And this can sometimes cause confusion.
For instance, only just over half (51 per cent) of Indian survey respondents knew that Britain and India were fighting alongside each other in the First World War. Over one quarter (27 per cent) believed they were enemies.
And while 63 per cent of UK survey respondents correctly identified that India fought alongside Britain, a full third (33 per cent) thought that India was fighting against Britain.
The First World War and the independence movement in India
This is despite the fact that India was heavily involved in the First World War as a key contributor to the allied forces and at that time an important part of the British Empire.
Having made huge sacrifices and demonstrated military valour equal to that of European soldiers, Indians widely expected a .’
and form shared
Imperial War Museum.
The First World War had lasting consequences that extended far beyond Europe. It set in motion forces that developed into India’s independence movement. Anne Bostanci, co-author of the British Council report, Remember the World as well as the War, ponders a promising emerging shift in the UK’s discussions about the First World War.
The UK’s history must include the stories of people from the former British Empire
The UK has a particular responsibility to construct an inclusive history of the experience of the First World War. It was a truly global conflict, and involved many Commonwealth countries that made huge sacrifices vital to Britain’s war effort.
However, as the British Council’s recent international survey — carried out in Egypt, France, Germany, India, Russia, Turkey and the UK — showed, the UK public has only a limited understanding of the extent and significance of the role of Commonwealth countries in the First World War, and is therefore some way away from recognising them appropriately.
Take the example of India
India made a huge contribution to Britain’s war effort. It sent staggering numbers of volunteers to fight and die on behalf of the allied forces. Almost 1.5 million Muslim, Sikh and Hindu men from regions such as the Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and Bihar volunteered in the Indian Expeditionary Force , which saw fighting on the Western Front, in East Africa, Mesopotamia, Egypt and Gallipoli. Volunteering offered a chance to break through the caste system, because becoming a soldier paid well and meant becoming part of the ‘warrior’ caste, which gave high status. However, of these men, around 50,000 died, 65,000 were wounded, and 10,000 were reported missing, while 98 Indian army nurses were killed. The country also supplied 170,000 animals, 3,7 million tonnes of supplies, jute for sandbags, and a large loan (the equivalent of about £2 billion today) to the British government.
But do the UK and India remember India’s role?
While the UK is one of the top ten unprompted associations with the First World War held by Indian survey respondents, India was not mentioned a single time as a top-of-mind association with the First World War among the 1,215 UK survey respondents. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that twice as many respondents in India compared to the UK feel that their country’s role in the First World War is — to this day — often misrepresented and misunderstood in global history (almost one quarter of Indian respondents indicated this).
At the same time, around three quarters of respondents in India as well as in the UK felt that their country is still affected by the consequences of the First World War.
Were Britain and India on the same side or fighting each other?
Looking for reasons why the First World War still looms large amongst people in India, it becomes clear that that period of history is inextricably bound up with the history of the independence movement. And this can sometimes cause confusion.
For instance, only just over half (51 per cent) of Indian survey respondents knew that Britain and India were fighting alongside each other in the First World War. Over one quarter (27 per cent) believed they were enemies.
And while 63 per cent of UK survey respondents correctly identified that India fought alongside Britain, a full third (33 per cent) thought that India was fighting against Britain.
The First World War and the independence movement in India
This is despite the fact that India was heavily involved in the First World War as a key contributor to the allied forces and at that time an important part of the British Empire.
Having made huge sacrifices and demonstrated military valour equal to that of European soldiers, Indians widely expected a .’
and form shared
Anushkatopper:
What is this ? You copied only
Similar questions