Answer:
By the autumn of the year 1944 the situation in British India had reached to a critical level. The Second World War was raging full tilt in most parts of the world. India was itself in real peril of an invasion by imperialist Japan. By that time the war had caused a debilitating strain on Great Britain’s resources and her financial reserves were all but depleted. Indian natives belonging to all communities and groups viewed the unfolding historical drama with increasing anxiety that arose from their feelings of uncertainty for their future. Fate had placed their imperial masters in the very discomfiting position of asking their subjects for help in routing another imperial adversary. However, time and circumstances could not allow an indulgent reflection on this historical irony for the colonial subjects of India. Especially for the Indian leaders time was of the essence as here was an opportunity to strike while the iron was hot. But just as England needed the Indians, so the Indians needed England, which despite its indisposition was nevertheless the only empire left which could bring some semblance of order to the global upheaval that threatened to lead to total destruction. Now this equilibrium of need allowed for negotiations between Indian politicians and the British as to the future of India. By this time Indian leaders throughout the political spectrum were demanding complete self-rule. Indian society was fast agitating against the patronizing and condescending hegemony of their colonial masters and ached to break free from the shackles of foreign subjugation. But the fate of India could not be decided by one community or social group alone. India was home to the world’s most diverse ethnic, linguistic and religious population. Indeed it was the British who had united this land through a long and usually violent process of consolidation. In the century since the complete conquest of India by England, nationalist feelings had started to take shape among the natives which was encouraged by the British for very pragmatic reasons. The territorial consolidation of India however favoured some more than others. In the new colonial India, Hindus found themselves in the enviable position of being the community having the biggest strength in sheer numbers. In contrast Muslim nationalism arose from feelings of shared loss and fall from grace they enjoyed as the ruling culture in the lands now occupied by the British. Thus two distinct nationalist currents dominated the intellectual climate in India and both were simultaneously shaping the consciousness of Hindu and Muslim communities.
Now that India seemed to be slipping fast from the grasp of the British Raj, the leaders of both Hindu and Muslim communities, each of which by that time had clear visions of the aspirations and goals of their respective constituencies, needed to find a common-ground so that freedom from colonial rule could finally be achieved. To clarify the picture let us examine the positions of the parties that held the keys to India’s destiny. There were three prime stake-holders in the political landscape of India. These were the principal parties that had the most to gain or lose from the critical decisions that would shape the course of India’s history. A brief summary of their position and concerns is outlined below.
His Majesty’s Government (H.M.G):
Besieged on all fronts and running fast towards bankruptcy, the British position in India was further complicated by growing resentment among the native population. Lord Wavell, the viceroy in India, in a letter to the Secretary of State for India, summarized the British position in this way “With a lost and hostile India, we are likely to be reduced in the east to the position of commercial bag-man.”1 He went on to write “The Congress and the League are the dominant parties in Hindu and Muslim India, and will remain so… We cannot by-pass them, and shall be compelled in the end to negotiate with them along with representatives of the less important parties.”1