Bengal Famine - Churchill deliberately let millions of Indians starve to death

Status
Not open for further replies.

Knowitall

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2019
Messages
7,930
Likes
35,897
found this article some time back and had saved this for people like @asianobserve

The famine was caused by war and natural disaster, the British did everything possible to help, and only local merchants are at fault for hoarding is the common defense of Colonial apologists. British primary sources themselves disagree with this finding. Read on

close to 200,000 tonnes were exported from Jan - Apr 42 (appendix 4 Famine enquiry commission titled Report on Bengal pp 26-28) there were very limited local stockpiles.

Then in 1942 towards the end as no food relief was forthcoming, the Raj ordered people to board 3 months worth of food supplies (Nanavati papers pp 196-7), this further had a disastrous effect by taking even more food from the markets into private stashes.

Moving on, we have the effect of inflationary pressures and Churchill's direct role in this to consider.

To pay for wartime purchases and grain imports (India was a net grain importing nation by the 30's), Britain stopped payment in currency, it issued a sort of an IOU against Indian Sterling reserves held in London. But the Raj paid out the military and armament companies in India in currency. To cover this the RBI pumped in currency notes (amount of currency in circulation in India rose 5 fold in 4 years) fuelling runaway inflation. (M N Roy, poverty or plenty pp 25-30)

This is when Amery asked London to settle outstanding dues on the Sterling accounts (so that inflation may ease) Churchill flat out refused (Leo Amery diaries pp 833) he instead told Amery,


Amery wrote and I quote him in full,


He further writes


  • Amery diaries pp 836-7
Then in Oct 42 came the first trigger, a massive cyclone that killed 10's of thousands and dispossessed millions. Appeals to the Civil supplies bureau to feed these millions went unheeded and the Indian official in charge R R Sen was asked to buy what rice he could and distribute it on his own accord (Nanavati papers Testimony of Sen. Pp 441)

Nov 1 1942 (a full 18 months before this telegram you so proudly cite) the American Welfare board issued a warning to the Raj about the fire food situation in Bengal and India in particular. It listed all the reasons that we argue to this day about,

  • Fall of Burma
  • Lack of effective price controls
  • Speculation
  • Exports
  • Rail priority for military shipments
  • Sharp inflation
So clearly this was not some secret but widely known including to the Americans and yet Churchill writes a letter pleading for help 18 months after?

Interestingly the Raj (famine enquiry commission, report of Bengal) through a food commission member of the Raj in an interview to the Statesman (Dec 18th, 1943) said that the food crisis is over and I pray that it may never occur again. So even by this yardstick, Churchill asks for help a full 4 months after the Raj declared this famine to be over.

Even in Nov 1943 when the famine was well and truly underway the Director of Civil supplies observed a shipment of grain being exported to Sri Lanka and Marutius (spelling?) So clearly export quotas were continuing to be met.

  • Nanavati papers Testimony of Pinnel (said director) pp 552
December 9th, Linlithgow (head of the Raj food department), asked for 600,000 tonnes of grain. He even threw in a carrot of how the war work would get hampered without this aid

  • vol 3, GoI food Dept to secy of state Dec 9, memo
This was denied. Reason? The cost would be prohibitive to the war effort

  • vol 3, GoI food Dept to secy of state Dec 15th, memo
Multiple such telegrams were sent in the period Dec 9th to 20th, all turned down.

Even the CiC of South Asia Wavell got in the act and agreed with Linlithgow, but his petition was also rejected

In January 43, the War Cabinet authorised 130,000 tonnes but only by the end of April!

  • Transfer of Power Vol 3, Amery to Linlithgow pp 520 (since you already quote extensively from TOP this should be easy for you to cross check)
Aug 4th 1943, the famine was well underway, Amery wrote and I quote,


He also demanded 500,000 tonnes of grains

  • Transfer of Power Vol 4, document #67
This too went unheeded.

The war cabinet after a month said that it could divert a portion of 30,000 tonnes from Australia but only after stockpiles in Sri Lanka and Middle east were satisfied

  • TOP vol 4, war cabinet minutes, 111th conclusion pp 155
By dec the famine was almost petering out but cholera and Malaria took hold. To combat cholera you need disinfectants, but disinfectants was being hoarded by the British army and it went unchecked.

  • Nanavati papers, testimony of Lt Col Cotter pp 386
Wavell though continued his telegram onslaught, on the 24th of dec he wrote one to the cabinet demanding 1.5mn tonnes of grain imports to ward of further starvation related deaths

The cabinet replied


  • TOP sexy of state to GoI, food department pp 585
The cabinet met on Feb 7, 1944 and Churchill ruled out any diverting of shipping to aid India. In this the minister for war transportation was in agreement with him.

They did though divert shipping to transport 10,000 tonnes of grain a month from India to Sri Lanka

  • TOP vol 4, war cabinet 16th conclusion pp 701
The cabinet further noted that the shortage in Bengal was


I am going to repeat this,

After some 2mn had died, after their own govt in India had been warning about shortages of grains for 18 months by then, after even the Americans warned about dire shortages the Churchillian cabinet said


After denying shipping at that too.

The cabinet though magnanimously agreed to set up a committee to investigate, consisting of Minister for War transportation, food minister and Winston's closest advisor, Lord Cherwell.

Amery notes in his diaries (pp 933) that Cherwell hated India just like Winston.

When news of these denials reached Delhi, Wavell shot off another Telegram, saying


  • TOP vol 4 Wavell to Amery pp 706
Churchill though remained stubborn and said while he would help, India should not ask the impossible

  • TOP vol 4, Churchill to Wavell pp 718
The war cabinet then again met Feb 14th 1944 Churchill again said there was no shipping available and that IF there was acute shortage, then possibly 24,000 tonnes of Iraqi grain could be sent as aid

Yes that's right, 16 months after the famine began the cabinet of Churchill was considering this famine to be a ploy and not significant.

The request of the Viceroy was again...rejected

And now we get to the fun parts.

The Viceroy again shot off a Telegram

*demanding 500,000 tonnes of grain

  • Aid request be placed to the Americans
  • India apply to the UNRRA
Both the cinc of India Auchinlek and Mountbatten sent their own telgrams stressing the urgency of the situation.

The cabinet then met on Feb 21,

They denied it again. They also said that Aussie grain (promised before, see 3 Paras above) on the way to India was redirected to the Balkans , the promised Iraqi grain was also rejected.

The request for aid to the Americans was denied (as it was assumed that the US had no shipping) as was the appeal to UNRA

  • Top vol 4, Churchill to Wavell pp 729
Then Churchill had a brainwave and the cabinet cables Wavell that India could get 300,000 tonnes of Aussie wheat in exchange for 300,000 tonnes of Bengal rice (a cruel joke if there ever was one)

  • TOP vol 4, Wavell to Amery pp 801.
But the criminal culpability of Churchill and his cabinet is writ large to any reasonable person.
Still waiting for you to contradict this article and tell us what is wrong here or would you continue to dismiss everything without any facts.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Quite big of you to say this to us. I don't think you are in any capacity to lecture us looking at your post history.

Well since everything is written why csn't I discuss about Churchill or the Bengal Famine in the same way I can duscuss Tiberius, Caligula or Nero or the Holocaust?
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
Well since everything is written why csn't I discuss about Churchill or the Bengal Famine in the same way I can duscuss Tiberius, Caligula or Nero or the Holocaust?
No you are person who is not discussing things you are person who is working to sell agenda propaganda those who discuss things acknowledge things but you are not that person
 

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
Wherever you have lifted these article from, and you've done a great deal of disservice to its author for not giving the courtesy of a citation or me for deoriving me of an opportunity to scrutinize the document
I've mentioned the author. It's a post on reddit. Googling it will take you like 5 seconds. Anyways this is off-topic

Is this from "Churchill's Secret War?" If it is, well the title is a dead give-away on the bias of the author.
Are your quotes from the Winston Churchill Project from Hillsdale College ? I can make similar arguments. Let's not go there. You can't claim "bias" when facts simply don't agree with you.

1) Upon being fully aware of the famine, the War Cabinet sent 200,000 tons of grain from Australia to India.
2) Churchill appointed General Archibald Wavel to sort out the situation, which he did by trucking excess rice from other parts of India that had them. The fact tge Gen. Wavel was able to source grains in India for Bengal region is a testament to the fact that - a) there were surplus food in other oarts of India; b) they could be sent to Bengal.
3) In April 1944 Churchill appealed for ships from the Americans to help transport grains to India but the Americans refused to provide as they have none to spare due to the upcoming Operation Overlord. Again, note that the War was everybody's priority, everything else were secondary. So even the Americans instituted rationing at home.
All of of your arguments were addressed in the previous post. I can summarise - The famine started in 1942. Interesting that Churchill took 1944 to be "fully aware" and make appeals for aid, when he had rejected them in the first place.

This was the situation in August 1943
"The War Cabinet's shipping assignments made in August 1943, shortly after Amery had pleaded for famine relief, show Australian wheat flour travelling to Ceylon, the Middle East, and Southern Africa – everywhere in the Indian Ocean but to India. Those assignments show a will to punish." Mukerjee 2010, pp. 112–114; 273
 

Knowitall

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2019
Messages
7,930
Likes
35,897
Well since everything is written why csn't I discuss about Churchill or the Bengal Famine in the same way I can duscuss Tiberius, Caligula or Nero or the Holocaust?
You are free to discuss and prove your point I have put forward a claim now it's your turn to refute it.

Whether you are uanble or unwilling to do it only shows that the point put forward by you is wrong.
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
The War Cabinet's shipping assignments made in August 1943, shortly after Amery had pleaded for famine relief, show Australian wheat flour travelling to Ceylon, the Middle East, and Southern Africa – everywhere in the Indian Ocean but to India. Those assignments show a will to punish." Mukerjee 2010, pp. 112–114; 273
Study by university of Michigan also confirms this.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
I've mentioned the author. It's a post on reddit. Googling it will take you like 5 seconds. Anyways this is off-topic


Are your quotes from the Winston Churchill Project from Hillsdale College ? I can make similar arguments. Let's not go there. You can't claim "bias" when facts simply don't agree with you.



All of of your arguments were addressed in the previous post. I can summarise - The famine started in 1942. Interesting that Churchill took 1944 to be "fully aware" and make appeals for aid, when he had rejected them in the first place.

This was the situation in August 1943
"The War Cabinet's shipping assignments made in August 1943, shortly after Amery had pleaded for famine relief, show Australian wheat flour travelling to Ceylon, the Middle East, and Southern Africa – everywhere in the Indian Ocean but to India. Those assignments show a will to punish." Mukerjee 2010, pp. 112–114; 273
No you are person who is not discussing things you are person who is working to sell agenda propaganda those who discuss things acknowledge things but you are not that person
Perhaps since I don't have strong emotions on the topic or even on Churchill I must say that I'm better positioned to discuss objectively this issue. Common sense will tell you that a disorganized famine is not a result of the order or wish of a single Government or man. It's a collection of different factors, both environmental and human (negligence, greed, war) that has come together to create this catastrophy.

The starvation of the Bengalis was neither a policy of the British or an order of Churchill. The British colonial officials themselves were alarmed, looked for solution once it happened, and found the solution evetually.

Was it preventable? Yes. But the solution should have come the provincial government first (stopping usurious loans to and landgrabbing of farmers, invoking police power or national security powers to confiscate rice being hoarded by merchants and distributing them evenly to the population, buying rice and other food from other provinces like Punjab, etc). Note that in most other parts of India there were surplus produce.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
I'm sorry but that's one page.
You are free to discuss and prove your point I have put forward a claim now it's your turn to refute it.

Whether you are uanble or unwilling to do it only shows that the point put forward by you is wrong.

What I'm saying is that the Bengal Famine is not the sole responsibility of Churchill, and certainly it was not a British policy or Churchill's orde4 to cause the famine. A lot of causes converged to make it happen.

We often resort or accept simplistic explanations to compkex problems. And the biggest hurdle to objective analysis is our biases.
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
Perhaps since I don't have strong emotions on the topic or even on Churchill I must say that I'm better positioned to discuss objectively this issue. Common sense will tell you that a disorganized famine is not a result of the order or wish of a single Government or man. It's a collection of different factors, both environmental and human (negligence, greed, war) that has come together to create this catastrophy.

The starvation of the Bengalis was neither a policy of the British or an order of Churchill. The British colonial officials themselves were alarmed, looked for solution once it happened, and found the solution evetually.

Was it preventable? Yes. But the solution should have come the provincial government first (stopping usurious loans to and landgrabbing of farmers, invoking police power or national security powers to confiscate rice being hoarded by merchants and distributing them evenly to the population, buying rice and other food from other provinces like Punjab, etc). Note that in most other parts of India there were surplus produce.
Lol solution were found when 3 million people died.
Even solution of hitler was found but till the time millions died.
Doesn't matter what you say but every study and official data CLAIM IT AS A MAN MADE FAMINE.

World's biggest empire have wealth from all over the globe cannot afford to pay for people in it's colony is so so funny. The real issue was the will which winston churchil lacked he deliberately denied the aid or imports and millions were dying he even exported stuff out of india wheat and all to Britain 1 million ton of wheat could have saved alot of lifes but British could have only thought that it was simply expensive.
Nothing solved tons of people died 3 million died.
After sometime india gained independence and we never faced a famine even with 1.3 billion people.
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
I'm sorry but that's one page.



What I'm saying is that the Bengal Famine is not the sole responsibility of Churchill, and certainly it was not a British policy or Churchill's orde4 to cause the famine. A lot of causes converged to make it happen.

We often resort or accept simplistic explanations to compkex problems. And the biggest hurdle to objective analysis is our biases.
Bias speaking every person who did the research found that it was man made famine but Asian observe who's knowledge about history is literally funny is claiming things otherwise you don't bring any accountability mate.
You are just doing face Saving measures in your propaganda life.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
As I said before, Nazis were big admirers of the British Raj. They drew inspiration from it.

View attachment 47478
Germany: A Reference Guide from the Renaissance to the Present - A Biesinger Joseph. He referencing the Mein Kampf
Oh man, there's an ocean of difference. While the British wanted to colonize the Indian subcontinent for economic and political purposes, the NAZIs wanted to totally supplant the Russians. In other words, Hitler wanted to use Russia and its neighbors as its land, and to do that they need to exterminate the Russians or Slavs much like the Jews. They do not want an intermingling of lower class race with their master Aryan race. By the way, it's there in your posted page.
 
Last edited:

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Bias speaking every person who did the research found that it was man made famine but Asian observe who's knowledge about history is literally funny is claiming things otherwise you don't bring any accountability mate.
You are just doing face Saving measures in your propaganda life.
If you read all these books you'll notice that Bengali rice production were drastically reduced in 1943 due to cyclones, flooding and then pests. This are certainly environmental factors. The human factor here is short-sightedness of the civil officials, failure to curb hoarding and profiteering of rice, failure to take drastic actions such as to confiscate rice hoards for distribution to peopke, failure to buy more rice from other provinces like Punjab (which Gen. Wavell easily did), and of course the onslaught if WW2 that drastically increased Punjab's population due to stationed soldiers and Burmese refugees, plus the stoppahe of rice imports from Burma (I doubt the Japanese would have allowed rice to be exported from Burma to British-held Bengal).
 

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
plus the stoppahe of rice imports from Burma (I doubt the Japanese would have allowed rice to be exported from Burma to British-held Bengal).
Subhash chandra bose was willing to send supplies from Myanmar.. And even tho production was low these blood suckers were still sucking india
Mukerjee has presented evidence the cabinet was warned repeatedly that the exhaustive use of Indian resources for the war effort could result in famine, but it opted to continue exporting rice from India to elsewhere in the empire.

Rice stocks continued to leave India even as London was denying urgent requests from India’s viceroy for more than 1m tonnes of emergency wheat supplies in 1942-43.

I'm posting this 5th time can't you understand things?
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Your argument now is "You're all biased, I'm not. Hence I'm correct. Facts and data be damned".

We're now close to the bottom of the pyramid.

View attachment 47479

Well I don't intend to name call. I'm simply pointing out that since you're clearly an Indian nationalist and as such you're emotionally invested to this issue and Churchill being the poster boy of British colonialism in India is an easy target for blame on bad things that happened during the colonial period.
 
Last edited:

Assassin 2.0

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Messages
6,087
Likes
30,705
Country flag
Millions of people died due to famines in India in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries; however, the relationship of historical famines with drought is complicated and not well understood. Using station‐based observations and simulations, we reconstruct soil moisture (agricultural) drought in India for the period 1870–2016. We show that over this century and a half period, India experienced seven major drought periods (1876–1882, 1895–1900, 1908–1924, 1937–1945, 1982–1990, 1997–2004, and 2011–2015) based on severity‐area‐duration analysis of reconstructed soil moisture. Out of six major famines (1873–74, 1876, 1877, 1896–97, 1899, and 1943) that occurred during 1870–2016, five are linked to soil moisture drought, and one (1943) was not. The three most deadly droughts (1877, 1896, and 1899) were linked with the positive phase of El Niño–Southern Oscillation. Five major droughts were not linked with famine, and three of those five nonfamine droughts occurred after Indian independence in 1947.


Repost.
 

LurkerBaba

Super Mod
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
7,882
Likes
8,125
Country flag
Well I don't intend to name call. I'm simply pointing out that since you're clearly an Indian nationalists you're emotionally invested to this issue and Churchill being the poster boy of British colonialism in India is an easy target for blame on bad things that happened during the colonial period.
Does not merit a response. Let's talk about facts and not emotions.

If you read all these books you'll notice that Bengali rice production were drastically reduced in 1943 due to cyclones, flooding and then pests. This are certainly environmental factors.
Facts unfortunately don't agree with you. Amartya Sen's work (which got him a Nobel in economics) and later studies on soil and moisture conditions conclude that the rice harvest in that time period was more than usual. The famine was clearly man made.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Subhash chandra bose was willing to send supplies from Myanmar.. And even tho production was low these blood suckers were still sucking india
Mukerjee has presented evidence the cabinet was warned repeatedly that the exhaustive use of Indian resources for the war effort could result in famine, but it opted to continue exporting rice from India to elsewhere in the empire.

Rice stocks continued to leave India even as London was denying urgent requests from India’s viceroy for more than 1m tonnes of emergency wheat supplies in 1942-43.

I'm posting this 5th time can't you understand things?
Just ask yourself how upon his appointment Gen. Wavell was immediately able to secure food from other provinces trucking them to Bengal.

And re The Guardian article you quoted, it's entitled - "Churchill’s policies contributed to 1943 Bengal famine – study" - which speaks for itself. Chirchill did not create the Bengal Famine, at most he merely contributed to it. But what is not mentioned in the article is that despite the continued exportation of rice from India perhaps to support British soldiers fighting in the different theaters, Gen. Wavell in 1943 was easily able to get foodstuff from other provinces and bring them to Bengal. So there was still enough surplus of food and rice to feed the starving poor Bengalis. So what happened?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top