द इण्डियन स्ट्रगल / भारतीय स्वाधीनता संग्राम (नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस - ऐतिहासिक विश्लेषण)
The Indian Struggle 1920-1934 by Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose
नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस द्वारा
पृष्ठ 273, कुल 339 में से
संदर्भ में पढ़ेंTHE FIGHT RESUMED 275
of it is that no preparations were made by the Congress for
the coming campaign and no plans were prepared in advance.
The campaign of 1932 was an imitation of that of 1930 and
the Government had prepared effective counter-measures for
dealing with a campaign of that sort. If the Congress wanted
to be successful in 1932 as well—it should have devised new
tactics to take the Government by surprise.
It is not generally understood why the Congress was
unsuccessful in 1932, though the same tactics had been
successful in 1930. The reason is that in 1930 the tactics of
the Congress had taken the Government by surprise. No
doubt, the same tactics had been employed in 1921 and 1922,
but owing to the sudden termination of the campaign in
February 1922, the Congress did not have to disclose all its
secrets. Moreover, eight years had elapsed since that cam-
paign and most of the men who had dealt with that campaign
were no longer in the service of the Government. Conse-
quently, the 1930 campaign was to all intents and purposes a
novel campaign and it took the Government some time to
comprehend it and to develop counter-tactics thereafter to
cope with it. The Delhi Truce gave the Government time to
do this work and on January 1st, 1932, when the Working Com-
mittee resolved to resume the civil-disobedience campaign,
the Government forces were in complete readiness to strike
immediately and ruthlessly. And they were not content with
striking at those who worked in the open, but made a clean
sweep of the brains and financiers of the movement as well.¹
During the first eight months of the year the fight went on
with unabated zeal. The declaration of the Government that
the Congress would soon be down and out was falsified.
The Congress was still alive and kicking, and there was no
sign that it would meet with an early death. In March the
movement was further strengthened because the Jamiat-ul-
ulema, the All-India organisation of the Moslem priests and
divines, under the leadership of Mufti Kifayetullah, declared
¹ Among those imprisoned in this way were Mr. Bhulabhai Desai, former
Advocate-General of Bombay and Mr. Sarat C. Bose, a prominent advocate
of Calcutta and a front-rank Congressman who was then an Alderman of
the Calcutta Municipality. At present (November 1934) the latter is
still in detention.