Wednesday, September 3, 2014

INDIA'S FORGOTTEN HOLOCAUST


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Maj Gen Ashok Coomar <coomar.ashok@gmail.com>
Date: 4 September 2014 11:01
Subject: FW: Fwd: INDIA'S FORGOTTEN HOLOCAUST

Having shipped the bumper crop of Bengal in 1942-43 to Britain to create war-time reserves, they starved and killed 4 million Indians during 1943-44 and called it famine. Read this tragic story which we have nearly forgotten.
And they call themselves “civilized”!
Ashok Coomar

Subject: Fw: Fwd: INDIA'S FORGOTTEN HOLOCAUST

I was 8/9 years old then.
We lived in Amritsar and we saw hordes of these poor 'bhooka bengalis' begging in broken Hindi for food, clothes and shelter. My parents helped as much as they could, just like everyone else. However, there was a limit to what we all could do. That time it was touted that Bengal's famine was an act of nature. Now we know that the truth lay elsewhere.
From: Santoshkumar Gupta <sanseeth@gmail.com>
To: Diwan Saraswat <diwan1939@gmail.com>; pushpa badami <pushpabadami14@gmail.com>; Lalit Mathur <lalitmathur35@gmail.com>; Krishan K Punchhi <kkpunchhi@yahoo.ca
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2014 7:45:52 AM
Subject: Fwd: INDIA'S FORGOTTEN HOLOCAUST

Remembering India’s forgotten holocaust


Rakesh Krishnan Simha

June 13, 2014

[British policies killed nearly 4 million Indians in the 1943-44 Bengal Famine]

T
he Bengal Famine of 1943-44 must rank as the greatest disaster in the subcontinent in the 20th century.

Nearly 4 million Indians died because of an artificial famine created by the British government, and yet it gets little more than a passing mention in Indian history books.

What is remarkable about the scale of the disaster is its time span. World War II was at its peak and the Germans were rampaging across Europe, targeting Jews, Slavs and the Roma for extermination.

It took Adolf Hitler and his Nazi cohorts 12 years to round up and murder 6 million Jews, but their Teutonic cousins, the British, managed to kill almost 4 million Indians in just over a year, with Prime Minister Winston Churchill cheering from the sidelines.

Australian biochemist Dr Gideon Polya has called the Bengal Famine a “manmade holocaust” because Churchill’s policies were directly responsible for the disaster.

Bengal had a bountiful harvest in 1942, but the British started diverting vast quantities of food grain from India to Britain, contributing to a massive food shortage in the areas comprising present-day West Bengal, Odisha, Bihar and Bangladesh.

Author Madhusree Mukerjee tracked down some of the survivors and paints a chilling picture of the effects of hunger and deprivation.

In Churchill’s Secret War, she writes: “Parents dumped their starving children into rivers and wells. Many took their lives by throwing themselves in front of trains. Starving people begged for the starchy water in which rice had been boiled. Children ate leaves and vines, yam stems and grass. People were too weak even to cremate their loved ones.”

“No one had the strength to perform rites,” a survivor tells Mukerjee. “Dogs and jackals feasted on piles of dead bodies in Bengal’s villages.”

The ones who got away were men who migrated to Calcutta for jobs and women who turned to prostitution to feed their families. “Mothers had turned into murderers, village belles into whores, fathers into traffickers of daughters,” writes Mukerjee.

Mani Bhaumik, the first to get a PhD from the IITs and whose invention of excimer surgery enabled Lasik eye surgery, has the famine etched in his memory. His grandmother starved to death because she used to give him a portion of her food.

By 1943 hordes of starving people were flooding into Calcutta, most dying on the streets. The sight of well-fed white British soldiers amidst this apocalyptic landscape was “the final judgement on British rule in India”, said the Anglophile Jawaharlal Nehru.

Churchill could easily have prevented the famine. Even a few shipments of food grain would have helped, but the British prime minister adamantly turned down appeals from two successive Viceroys, his own Secretary of State for India and even the President of the US .

Subhas Chandra Bose, who was then fighting on the side of the Axis forces, offered to send rice from Myanmar, but the British censors did not even allow his offer to be reported.

Churchill was totally remorseless in diverting food to the British troops and Greek civilians. To him, “the starvation of anyhow underfed Bengalis (was) less serious than sturdy Greeks”, a sentiment with which Secretary of State for India and Burma, Leopold Amery, concurred.

Amery was an arch-colonialist and yet he denounced Churchill’s “Hitler-like attitude”.

Urgently beseeched by Amery and the then Viceroy Archibald Wavell to release food stocks for India, Churchill responded with a telegram asking why Gandhi hadn’t died yet.

Wavell informed London that the famine “was one of the greatest disasters that has befallen any people under British rule”. He said when Holland needs food, “ships will of course be available, quite a different answer to the one we get whenever we ask for ships to bring food to India”.

Churchill’s excuse — currently being peddled by his family and supporters — was Britain could not spare the ships to transport emergency supplies, but Mukerjee has unearthed documents that challenge his claim.

She cites official records that reveal ships carrying grain from Australia bypassed India on their way to the Mediterranean.

Churchill’s hostility toward Indians has long been documented. At a War Cabinet meeting, he blamed the Indians themselves for the famine, saying they “breed like rabbits”. His attitude toward Indians may be summed up in his words to Amery:

“I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.”

On another occasion, he insisted they were “the beastliest people in the world next to the Germans”.

According to Mukerjee, “Churchill’s attitude toward India was quite extreme, and he hated Indians, mainly because he knew India couldn’t be held for very long.”

She writes in The Huffington Post, “Churchill regarded wheat as too precious a food to expend on non-whites, let alone on recalcitrant subjects who were demanding independence from the British Empire. He preferred to stockpile the grain to feed Europeans after the war was over.”

In October 1943, at the peak of the famine, Churchill said at a lavish banquet to mark Wavell’s appointment: “When we look back over the course of years, we see one part of the world’s surface where there has been no war for three generations. Famines have passed away — until the horrors of war and the dislocations of war have given us a taste of them again — and pestilence has gone… This episode in Indian history will surely become the Golden Age as time passes, when the British gave them peace and order, and there was justice for the poor, and all men were shielded from outside dangers.”

Churchill was not only a racist but also a liar.

A history of holocausts

To be sure, Churchill’s policy towards famine-stricken Bengal wasn’t any different from earlier British conduct in India.

In Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis points out that here were 31 serious famines in 120 years of British rule compared with 17 in the 2,000 years before British rule.

In his book, Davis tells the story of the famines that killed up to 29 million Indians.

These people were, he says, murdered by British State policy.

In 1876, when drought destituted the farmers of the Deccan plateau, there was a net surplus of rice and wheat in India.

But the Viceroy, Robert Bulwer-Lytton, insisted that nothing should prevent their export to England.

In 1877 and 1878, at the height of the famine, grain merchants exported record quantities of grain. As the peasants began to starve, government officials were ordered “to discourage relief works in every possible way”.

 
....

No comments:

Post a Comment