THE Communist Party had come out in opposition against the Second World War which broke out in September 1939. The Party called upon the people in India to oppose the war and take the lead in launching struggles against the harsh economic conditions resulting from the war. Though the Party faced severe repression with hundreds of its workers being arrested and the ban on the Party and its publications, the members of the Party led many struggles against price rise, food shortages and strikes by the working class.

The character of the war changed after Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941. The fascist forces attacked the bastion of socialism and the war became a world-wide fight against fascism represented by the three axis powers – Germany, Italy and Japan.

This change in the character of the war was not acknowledged by the CPI then. It continued to as late as July 1941 to oppose the imperialist war and the Polit Bureau resolution called for converting the war into a revolutionary war.

In the meantime, questions about the stand of the Party on the war were raised by the communist detenues in the Deoli detention camp. This group under the leadership of B T Ranadive sent a document to the Polit Bureau calling for a change in the assessment of the war and the tactics to be pursued. They stated that with the Nazi aggression on the Soviet Union, the war had acquired the character of people’s war against fascism.

The document sent from Deoli by the group of leaders of the CPI was known as the jail document. It stated that “By its murderous attack on the only proletarian state, Nazism converts itself again into the main enemy of the international proletariat and colonial proletariat. The Party of the proletariat in India therefore must positively intervene in this war, declare it to be a people’s war and strain every nerve to win it as quickly as possible.”

The Communist Party of Great Britain also sent a document to the CPI leadership regarding the changed character of the war.

As a result of these discussions the Polit Bureau adopted a resolution in December 1941. This resolution acknowledged that the character of the war had fundamentally transformed after Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union. It had now become a people’s war instead of an imperialist war. It called for developing a “people’s war movement” in the country. The victory in the people’s war against fascism would help the Indian people’s struggle for independence. 

The ban on the Party was lifted in July 1942 and the authorities began the release of the leaders who had been detained.

The slogan of people’s war and the line of integrating India’s struggle for freedom with the world wide struggle against fascism did not however find favour among the nationalist and Left nationalist circles. The Party stand, however, found appreciation among sections of the intelligentsia.

After the British government refused to negotiate on the demands of the Congress in return for cooperation in the war effort, the Congress under Gandhiji’s leadership launched an individual satyagraha in October 1940.  The British government refused to concede to any changes in the central government set-up which would give India something akin to dominion status. 

After a year of the individual satyagraha, the British sent Sir Stafford Cripps, a member of the wartime cabinet to India, to negotiate with the Indian leaders. The Cripps Mission failed in offering anything substantive towards independence. After the unsuccessful outcome of the Cripps Mission, Gandhiji decided that there should be a mass struggle which would compel the British to negotiate and come to a settlement with the Indian National Congress.

It is with this in mind that Gandhiji persuaded the Congress leadership, a section of whom were of the view that the time is not conducive for such a struggle, to rally behind his plan of action. The AICC gave a call on August 8, 1942 in Bombay for a Quit India Movement from August 9, 1942. The British government retaliated by rounding up most of the leadership and imprisoning them. Contrary to Gandhiji’s expectation, the British refused to climb down and unleashed severe repression against the protesters. In retaliation, railways and telephone lines were cut and post offices and local government offices attacked. Tens of thousands of people joined the militant protests.

The CPI implementing its people’s war line emphasized the need for making the war effort against fascism successful and increasing production to strengthen the war effort. Politically it demanded the release of the leaders of the Congress Party, the establishment of national unity through Congress-League unity and the formation of a national government.

The CPI was also opposed to any form of struggle which would lead to disruption of the war effort, especially at a time when the Japanese army after occupying Burma was marching towards the Indian border. It opposed the Quit India call fearing that it would lead to disruption of united efforts necessary to stave off the Japanese advance.

The Party, however, condemned the repression on the freedom fighters and called for the immediate release of the national leaders.

This stance of the Party went against the anti-imperialist mood which had developed among the people. The opposition to the Quit India movement led to its isolation from the nationalist political struggles.

Subsequently, after independence, the Party reviewed the stand taken and came to the following conclusions: While the political line of people’s war was generally correct, the Party committed some serious mistakes for which it had to pay a heavy price. While correctly supporting the people’s war it failed to integrate the contradiction in the international sphere with the national level contradiction. While the struggle against fascism was the main contradiction in the international sphere, at the national level, the contradiction between the people and British imperialism was dominant. It was therefore wrong on the part of the Party to oppose the Quit India movement and adopt a line of avoiding mass struggle on the plea that it would damage the war effort.

The guidance given by the Party to fighting organisations of the working people, particularly the trade unions and kisan sabhas, was also affected by a reformist deviation. The task of increasing industrial and agricultural production in order to help the war effort was taken up in such a way as to discourage militant struggles of the working people. The opponents of the Party were given an oppor¬tunity to disrupt the unity of the trade unions, kisan sabhas and other mass organisations.  For the first time, mass organisations of every kind and at every level were divided along party-political lines. 

The Party failed to note that a turning point came in the war with the victory of the Red Army in Stalingrad. It continued with the understanding that the fascist danger was increasing for India even after that. It should have been able to adopt more flexible tactics to step up the struggle against British rule in the post-Stalingrad period.

After the war ended in 1945, the Party assumed the leadership of many militant mass struggles in the post-war upsurge.

While the Party suffered a degree of isolation from the militant anti-imperialist nationalist circles in this period, its work among the people on the difficulties faced due to the war situation helped the Party to develop relations with new sections of the people and new areas. The fight against price rise and food rations, fight against black marketeering and hoarding and against the shortages of essential goods were constant activities which marked the work of the Party units, a good example being the Malabar region in Kerala. In Bengal, the relief work undertaken by the communists during the famine of 1943 helped the Party to make a breakthrough among different sections of the people.

The Communist Party’s work among the people and its firm anti-imperialist stance finally attracted even those who had participated and led the Quit India movement. Leaders like Aruna Asaf Ali joined the Party.

The Party did not, despite its wrong understanding, ever collaborate with the British rulers. The Home Department in a dispatch on September 2, 1942 to the Secretary of State London reported that “The behavior of many of the CPI members proves what has always been clear, namely, that it is composed of anti-British revolutionaries”. Another confidential assessment of the then British government on September 20, 1943 states, “It (CPI) is primarily a nationalist party working for Indian independence notwithstanding its lip service to internationalism, a large proportion of its members are attracted to its fold because it stands for the overthrow of British rule”.