Chapter 10On the Integration of the French Settlements in India, 1947–1950 · The Future Union (A Programme)

hereafter and even large and powerful nations cannot really be secure. India, if she remains divided, will not herself be sure of her safety. It is therefore to the interest of all that union should take place. Only human imbecility and stupid selfishness could prevent it. Against that, it has been said, even the gods strive in vain; but it cannot stand for ever against the necessity of Nature and the Divine Will. Nationalism will then have fulfilled itself; an international spirit and outlook must grow up and international forms and institutions; even it may be such developments as dual or multilateral citizenship and a voluntary fusion of cultures may appear in the process of the change and the spirit of nationalism losing its militancy may find these things perfectly compatible with the integrity of its own outlook. A new spirit of oneness will take hold of the human race.

The spiritual gift of India to the world has already begun. India’s spirituality is entering Europe and America in an ever increasing measure. That movement will grow; amid the disas-ters of the time more and more eyes are turning towards her with hope and there is even an increasing resort not only to her teachings, but to her psychic and spiritual practice.

The rest is still a personal hope and an idea and ideal which has begun to take hold both in India and in the West on forward-looking minds. The difficulties in the way are more formidable than in any other field of endeavour, but difficulties were made to be overcome and if the Supreme Will is there, they will be overcome. Here too, if this evolution is to take place, since it must come through a growth of the spirit and the inner consciousness, the initiative can come from India and although the scope must be universal, the central movement may be hers.

Such is the content which I put into this date of India’s liberation; whether or how far or how soon this connection will be fulfilled, depends upon this new and free India.

[2]

[Short Version]

August 15th, 1947 is the birthday of free India. It marks for her the end of an old era, the beginning of a new age. But we can also make it by our life and acts as a free nation an important date in a new age opening for the whole world, for the political, social, cultural and spiritual future of humanity.

August 15th is my own birthday and it is naturally gratifying to me that it should have assumed this vast significance. I take this coincidence, not as a fortuitous accident, but as the sanction and seal of the Divine Force that guides my steps on the work with which I began life, the beginning of its full fruition. Indeed, on this day I can watch almost all the world-movements which I hoped to see fulfilled in my lifetime, though then they looked like impracticable dreams, arriving at fruition or on their way to achievement. In all these movements free India may well play a large part and take a leading position.

The first of these dreams was a revolutionary movement which would create a free and united India. India today is free but she has not achieved unity. At one moment it almost seemed as if in the very act of liberation she would fall back into the chaos of separate States which preceded the British conquest. But fortunately it now seems probable that this danger will be averted and a large and powerful, though not yet a complete union will be established. Also, the wisely drastic policy of the Constituent Assembly has made it probable that the problem of the depressed classes will be solved without schism or fissure. But the old communal division into Hindus and Muslims seems now to have hardened into a permanent political division of the country. It is to be hoped that this settled fact will not be accepted as settled for ever or as anything more than a temporary expedient. For if it lasts, India may be seriously weakened, even crippled: civil strife may remain always possible, possible even a new invasion and foreign conquest. India’s internal development and prosperity may be impeded, her position among the nations weakened, her destiny impaired or even frustrated. This must not be; the partition must go. Let us hope that that may come about naturally, by an increasing recognition of the necessity not only of peace and concord but of common action, by the practice of common action and the creation of means for that purpose. In this way unity may finally come about under whatever form — the exact form may have a pragmatic but not a fundamental importance. But by whatever means, in whatever way, the division must go; unity must and will be achieved, for it is necessary for the greatness of India’s future.

Another dream was for the resurgence and liberation of the peoples of Asia and her return to her great role in the progress of human civilisation. Asia has arisen; large parts are now quite free or are at this moment being liberated: its other still subject or partly subject parts are moving through whatever struggles towards freedom. Only a little has to be done and that will be done today or tomorrow. There India has her part to play and has begun to play it with an energy and ability which already indicate the measure of her possibilities and the place she can take in the council of the nations.

The third dream was a world-union forming the outer basis of a fairer, brighter and nobler life for all mankind. That unification of the human world is under way; there is an imperfect initiation organised but struggling against tremendous difficul-ties. But the momentum is there and it must inevitably increase and conquer. Here too India has begun to play a prominent part and, if she can develop that larger statesmanship which is not limited by the present facts and immediate possibilities but looks into the future and brings it nearer, her presence may make all the difference between a slow and timid and a bold and swift development. A catastrophe may intervene and interrupt or destroy what is being done, but even then the final result is sure. For unification is a necessity of Nature, an inevitable movement. Its necessity for the nations is also clear, for without it the freedom of the small nations may be at any moment in peril and the life even of the large and powerful nations insecure. The unification is therefore to the interests of all, and only human imbecility and stupid selfishness can prevent it; but these cannot stand for ever against the necessity of Nature and the Divine Will. But an outward basis is not enough; there must grow up an international spirit and outlook, international forms and institutions must appear, perhaps such developments as dual or multilateral citizenship, willed interchange or voluntary fusion of cultures. Nationalism will have fulfilled itself and lost its militancy and would no longer find these things incompatible with self-preservation and the integrality of its outlook. A new spirit of oneness will take hold of the human race.

Another dream, the spiritual gift of India to the world has already begun. India’s spirituality is entering Europe and America in an ever increasing measure. That movement will grow; amid the disasters of the time more and more eyes are turning towards her with hope and there is even an increasing resort not only to her teachings, but to her psychic and spiritual practice.

The final dream was a step in evolution which would raise man to a higher and larger consciousness and begin the solution of the problems which have perplexed and vexed him since he first began to think and to dream of individual perfection and a perfect society. This is still a personal hope and an idea, an ideal which has begun to take hold both in India and in the West on forward-looking minds. The difficulties in the way are more formidable than in any other field of endeavour, but difficulties were made to be overcome and if the Supreme Will is there, they will be overcome. Here too, if this evolution is to take place, since it must proceed through a growth of the spirit and the inner consciousness, the initiative can come from India and, although the scope must be universal, the central movement may be hers.

Such is the content which I put into this date of India’s liberation; whether or how far this hope will be justified depends upon the new and free India.

On the Integration of

the French Settlements in India

1947–1950

The Future Union

(A Programme)

In this period of epoch-making changes when India is achieving at this very moment a first form of freedom and the power to determine her own destiny, it behoves us in French India to consider our situation and make decisions for our own future which will enable us to live in harmony with the new India and the new world around us. At this juncture, we of the Socialist Party wish to define our own policy and the future prospects of the French Settlements as we envisage them.1

For a long time past we in these Settlements have watched with an eager sympathy the struggle that has been going on in British India for self-government and independence and, though we could not take part, have felt it as if it were part of our own destiny since the achievement of these things could not but herald or accompany our own passage from the state of dependence as a colony to the freedom and autonomy which all peoples must desire. India has achieved her freedom but as yet with limitations and under circumstances which it did not desire and which do not admit of a complete rejoicing at the victory; for it is not the united India for which we had hoped that has emerged, but an India parcelled out and divided and threatened with perils and difficulties and disadvantages which would not 1 Sri Aurobindo wrote (rather, dictated) this “programme” for the use of the French India Socialist Party, whose position on the issue of the integration of the French Set-tlements in India corresponded with his in some respects. It should not be taken as a definitive statement of his own opinion on the matter. The text was published in a manifesto issued by the party in June 1947. — Ed.

have been there but for the disunion and the internal quarrels which brought about this unhappy result. Among the leaders of the country who have reluctantly consented to the settlement made there is no enthusiasm over it but only a regretful acceptance and a firm determination to make the most of what has been won, overcome the difficulties and dangers and achieve for the country as great a position in the world and as much power and prosperity as is possible for a divided India. For our part we have received a promise of an autonomy which will make us a free people within the French Union, but this is as yet only a promise, or a declared policy and the steps have not yet been taken which would make it a practical reality. We have been demanding a fulfilment of this policy as rapid as possible and there is no real reason why it should not be carried out with something of the same speed that is marking developments in British India. There there have been complexities and differences which stood in the way of an easy and early solution, but there are none such here; we have been and are united in our demand and the change already decided can be and ought to be carried out at once.

But one complexity has begun to arise and threatens to increase if there is further delay in satisfying the aspirations of our people. The life of French India has had, since its inception, a dual character which points to two different possibilities for its future destiny if a third solution does not intervene which reconciles the two possibilities. On one side, we in French India are not in the essentials of our existence a separate people: we and those on the other side of the borders of the five Settlements are brothers, we are kith and kin, we have the same nationality, the same way and habits of life, the same religions, the same general culture and outlook, the same languages and literatures, the same traditions; we are Indians, belong to the same society, we do not feel separate, we have the same feeling of patriotism for our common country; our land is an intimate part of India. All this would push us naturally to desire to unite together and become parts of a single India. That feeling has not been absent in the past, but now it is becoming vocal and is the declared policy and demand of a number among us while others stand on the line between the two possibilities before us and have a natural inclination to prefer this solution; for it is difficult for any Indian not to look forward towards such a unification in the future. On the other hand, the history of the past two centuries has developed a certain individuality of the people of French India and made them a common entity amid the rest. French India has developed different institutions of its own, political, administrative, judicial, educational, it has its own industries, its own labour legislation and other differentiating characteristics. There is also the impress of the French language and French culture. All Asiatic countries have been developing a mixed intellectuality, public life and social ideas; our life is Asiatic in its basis with a structure at the top adopted from Europe. In British India this superstructure has been formed by the use of English as a common language of the educated classes and by the study of English political ideas and institutions and English literature: in French India the superstructure is French, it is the French language through which there has been communication and a common public life between the Bengalees, Tamils, Andhras and Malayalees who constitute the people of French India; we have been looking at the world outside through a study of the French language and French institutions and French literature. All this has made a difference; it has made it possible and natural for us to accept the offer made that we should become a free people within the French Union. But this solution can be durable only if there is some kind of close connection and even union with the rest of India industrial, economic and other, for we depend on the rest of India for our very food and the necessities of our life and our general prosperity and, if cut off from it, we could not even live. Apart from all feelings and sentiments this stark necessity demands an intimate co-operation between the new India and French India.

Under the push of a common Indian patriotism and the feeling of oneness with the rest of India some are putting forward the claim that we should join immediately whatever Indian Union emerges from the present embroilments without any other consideration of any kind. This is a rash and one-sided view of things which we cannot accept. In our political decisions we must take into account the developments in British India, but it would be erroneous to hold that in all political affairs we should imitate her. This would show on our part a lack of understanding of local conditions as well as an utter failure of creative thought so needed at a most critical and constructive period of the history of India. Some go so far as to propose a kind of self-extinction of each French territory by their merging in a suicidal way into the Indian Union. This would mean that our towns would become mostly small and unimportant mofussil towns in the mass of what has been British India and would lose their present status and dignity and vigour of their life and distinctive institutions and much loss and damage to existing popular interests might ensue. A drastic change and obliteration of this kind seems to us most undesirable; it would bring no enrichment of life or advantage to the rest of India and no advantage but rather impoverishment of life to French India. If French India is to enter the Indian Union, it should not be in this way but as an autonomous unit preserving its individual body and character. All should be done with due regard to its particular position and all decisions should be made according to the will of her elected representatives: we should also ascertain exactly our economic, social and administrative position so that any change should not affect adversely any section of the people. Moreover without having any precision about the future States of India and our place among them it would be utter folly to break our social, cultural, administrative and judicial structure without any concrete scheme to replace it. The existence of autonomous units with a vivid life and individuality of their own has always been a characteristic of our country, part of its polity and civilisation and one of the causes of its greatness and the variety and opulence of Indian culture. The unity of India is desirable but not a mechanical unification and that is indeed no part of the scheme envisaged by the leaders of India; they envisage a union of autonomous units with a strong centre. In seeking political unity and independence we must not go on thinking and working under subjection to imported Western and British notions of political and economic structure. It is patent through recent developments that a political and purely outward unity with a mechanical uniformity and centralisation would prove a failure. Whatever we decide let us preserve the principle peculiarly suited to the unique psychological and physical con-ditions of this great land and the life of its people which was to develop through numerous autonomous centres of culture and power.

But there are also other considerations which militate against any such hasty action as has been proposed; we must consider carefully the actual position and possibilities in India under the peculiar and very unsatisfactory arrangement that has been made. This arrangement has not been freely chosen by the people and their leaders and does not create a free and united nation; it is a British plan accepted under the duress of circumstances as unavoidable in order to find a way out of the present state of indecision and drift and put an end to internal disorder and strife. It is not a definite solution; it seems rather like an opening of a new stage, a further period of trial and effort towards the true goal. What immediately emerges is not independence but the establishment of two British Dominions independent of each other and without any arrangement for harmonisation or common action; it is expected that within a year or so two independent Indias will be the result with different constitutions of their own animated by different and, it may well be, opposing principles and motives. It is hoped also that this division will be accepted by all as a final solution, both Indias settling down separately into a peaceful internal development, and that the fierce dissensions, violent and ruinous disturbances and sanguinary conflicts of recent times will finally disappear. But this is not certain; the solution has not been satisfactory to any party to the internal struggle and if the new States continue to be divided within themselves into communal camps led by communal bodies one of which will look outside the State to the other for inspiration and guidance and for the protection of the community, then tension will continue and the latent struggle may break out in disturbances, bloodshed and perhaps finally in open war. Into such a condition of things French India would not care to enter; among us communal dissensions have not been rife, all communities have lived amicably together and participated peacefully in a common public life; but if we entered into such a state of tension and continued conflict, the infection would inevitably seize us and there would be the same communal formations and the same undesirable features. We should be careful therefore not to make any such rash and hasty decisions as some propose but stand apart in our own separate status and wait for more certain developments. A closer relation with the new India is desirable and necessary, since we are Indians and French India a part of India intimately connected and dependent on the rest for her prosperity and for her very existence. But this need not take the form suggested or involve the obliteration of our separate status, a destruction of our past and its results and the loss of our individual existence. A reconciliation between the two elements of our existence and its historical development is desirable and possible.

It seems to be supposed by some that we have only to ask the new Indian Union for inclusion within it and this would automatically accomplish itself without any further difficulty; but things are not so simple as that. Undoubtedly the sentiment of the Indian people had in the past envisaged an India one and indivisible and the abolition of the small enclaves of foreign rule such as Portuguese and French India as imperative and inevitable. But circumstances have shaped differently; India one and indivisible has not emerged and the Indian Union which is nearest to it and with which alone a fusion would be possible, is not yet established, has still to affirm itself and find and confirm its strength in very difficult circumstances. In that process it is seeking to establish amicable relations with all foreign powers and is already in such relations with France. It will desire no doubt either union or a closer relation with French India but it is not likely to be in a hurry to achieve it through a dispute or conflict with France. It could indeed use means of pressure without the use of military force which would make the existence