Core Content: Division in the Congress
Growing Ideological Differences between Moderates and Extremists
By 1907, the ideological chasm between the Moderates and Extremists had widened considerably, making a confrontation almost inevitable.
Over Goals:
- Moderates: Aimed for self-government within the British Empire (Dominion Status or colonial self-government) as a long-term objective. Believed in gradual constitutional progress.
- Extremists: Advocated for Swaraj (self-rule) as the primary and immediate goal. For Tilak, it meant "self-rule" as a birthright; for Aurobindo Ghosh, it leaned towards complete autonomy or independence. Impatient with slow pace.
Over Methods:
- Moderates: Believed in constitutional agitation – petitions, prayers, protests within legal limits, appealing to British justice (the "Three P's").
- Extremists: Advocated for more assertive and direct methods, including passive resistance, boycott of British goods and institutions, promotion of Swadeshi, and mass mobilization. Lost faith in purely constitutional methods.
Over Pace of Movement:
- Moderates: Favored a gradual and phased approach to political reform, believing India was not yet ready for full self-government or mass struggles.
- Extremists: Demanded a rapid advance towards Swaraj and were impatient with the slow progress under Moderate leadership. Believed in immediate and direct action.
Events Leading to the Split
The tensions between the two factions came to a head in the period leading up to the Surat session.
Calcutta Session (1906, Dadabhai Naoroji as President):
- Compromise Resolutions: Four key resolutions passed on Swadeshi, Boycott, National Education, and Self-Government (Swaraj).
- Definition of Swaraj: Dadabhai Naoroji declared goal as "Swaraj or self-government like that of the United Kingdom or the Colonies."
- Extremist Dissatisfaction: Wanted resolutions applied more vigorously, boycott extended beyond Bengal to include government services.
Controversy over Presidentship of Surat Session (1907):
- Extremists' Choice: Proposed Lala Lajpat Rai or Bal Gangadhar Tilak.
- Moderates' Choice: Favored Rashbehari Ghosh.
- Venue Shift: From Nagpur (Extremist stronghold) to Surat (Moderate bastion).
Fear among Extremists:
- Suspected Moderates planned to dilute or rescind Calcutta resolutions, fearing severe government repression.
The Split at Surat Session (December 1907)
- Chaos and Disorder: Disputes over Rashbehari Ghosh's election as president, atmosphere charged, Tilak's attempts to speak met resistance.
- Pandemonium: Chaos ensued, with chairs thrown, a shoe hurled at the dais (reportedly hitting Pherozeshah Mehta and Surendranath Banerjea), and general disorder.
- Session Broke Up: The session had to be suspended amidst the pandemonium.
- Extremists Expelled: Moderates held a separate convention, amended Congress constitution, effectively expelling Extremist leaders. INC came firmly under Moderate control.
Consequences of the Split
- Weakening of the Nationalist Movement: Led to significant weakening of INC and broader movement. Congress lost popular appeal and dynamism for years. Extremists lacked organized platform.
- British Policy of "Rallying the Moderates and Repressing the Extremists":
- Rallying Moderates (Carrot): Offered constitutional concessions (e.g., Morley-Minto Reforms, 1909) to appease Moderates.
- Repressing Extremists (Stick): Came down heavily on Extremist leaders. Bal Gangadhar Tilak arrested (1908), imprisoned for six years. Aurobindo Ghosh and Bipin Chandra Pal faced repression/withdrawal.
- Rise of Revolutionary Nationalism: Disillusioned youth turned towards revolutionary terrorism. Secret societies became more active.
- Setback to Swadeshi Movement: Split, coupled with government repression and removal of key Extremist leaders, led to its decline by 1908-09.
- Efforts for reunion later: Need for united front realized, culminating in re-entry at Lucknow Session (1916) (Lucknow Pact), due to Annie Besant and Tilak.
Surat Split: Key Aspects
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Background Differences |
Goals: Swaraj (Moderates: self-gov within Empire; Extremists: complete autonomy/independence). Methods: Constitutional agitation (Moderates) vs. Passive resistance, mass action (Extremists). Pace: Gradualism vs. Rapid advance. |
| Events Leading Up |
Calcutta Session (1906): Compromise resolutions on Swadeshi, Boycott, National Education, Self-Government (Swaraj). Extremists wanted wider application. Controversy over Presidentship (Surat 1907): Extremists wanted Tilak/Lajpat Rai; Moderates favored Rashbehari Ghosh. Extremists feared dilution of Calcutta resolutions. |
| The Split (Surat) | December 1907. Chaos on dais, session broke up. Extremists expelled from Congress. |
| Consequences |
- Weakening of Nationalist Movement; INC dominated by Moderates, lost mass appeal temporarily. - British policy of "Rallying Moderates, Repressing Extremists" (Morley-Minto Reforms & Tilak's imprisonment). - Rise of Revolutionary Nationalism. - Setback to Swadeshi Movement. - Later reunion efforts (Lucknow Pact 1916). |
A Timeline of Divergence
Late 19th Century: Early Ideological Seeds
Growing differences between the 'petitioning' Moderates and the nascent 'self-reliance' philosophy of future Extremists start to emerge within INC.
1905: Partition of Bengal
Ignites widespread protest and the Swadeshi Movement. Extremists advocate broader boycott, Moderates prefer limited scope, sharpening differences.
1906: Calcutta Session - Temporary Truce
Dadabhai Naoroji presides. Compromise resolutions on Swadeshi, Boycott, National Education, and Swaraj (self-government) are passed, but tensions remain high.
Dec 1907: Surat Session - The Confrontation
Controversy over presidentship (Extremists for Tilak/Lajpat Rai vs. Moderates for Rashbehari Ghosh). Fears of diluting Calcutta resolutions.
Dec 1907: The Split
Pandemonium erupts at the Surat session. Chairs and shoes are thrown. The session is suspended, and Extremists are expelled from the Congress.
1908: Tilak's Imprisonment
Bal Gangadhar Tilak, a key Extremist leader, is arrested and sentenced to six years in Mandalay, Burma, severely weakening the Extremist movement.
1909: Morley-Minto Reforms
British introduce constitutional concessions, partly to 'rally the Moderates' and further isolate the Extremists.
1916: Lucknow Pact - Reunion
Moderates and Extremists finally reunite at the Lucknow Session of the Congress, largely due to the efforts of Annie Besant and Tilak.
Exam Preparation Insights
- Year of Surat Split: 1907.
- Location of Split: Surat Session of INC.
- Main Factions: Moderates and Extremists.
- Key Differences: Goals (Swaraj definition), Methods (Constitutional vs. Passive Resistance/Mass Action), Pace.
- Calcutta Session (1906): Presided by Dadabhai Naoroji; passed resolutions on Swadeshi, Boycott, National Education, Self-Government (Swaraj).
- Presidency Controversy (Surat 1907): Extremists proposed Lala Lajpat Rai/Tilak; Moderates supported Rashbehari Ghosh (who was elected).
- Immediate Outcome: Extremists expelled from INC.
- Consequences of Split: Weakened INC, British policy ("Rally the Moderates, Repress the Extremists"), Rise of Revolutionary Nationalism, Setback to Swadeshi Movement.
- Key Extremist Leader Imprisoned Post-Split: Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1908-1914).
- Reunion: Lucknow Session, 1916.
1. Inevitability of the Split?:
- Culmination of fundamental ideological differences brewing for years, rather than just personality clashes.
- British policy of token concessions and repression exacerbated differences.
2. British Exploitation of the Split:
- "Carrot and stick" policy: Carrot (Morley-Minto Reforms 1909) for Moderates, Stick (severe repression including Tilak's imprisonment) for Extremists.
- Temporarily weakened the overall nationalist movement.
3. Impact on the Character of the Nationalist Movement:
- Short-term Setback: Lull in activity, INC lost popular appeal, Swadeshi declined.
- Rise of Alternative Streams: Revolutionary terrorism gained traction among disillusioned youth.
- Long-term Realization: Division highlighted need for unity, leading to eventual reconciliation (Lucknow 1916).
4. Miscalculations on Both Sides:
- Moderates: Overestimated British sincerity, underestimated popular frustration.
- Extremists: Underestimated state strength, difficulties of sustained mass mobilization without unified organization.
While a historical event, its relevance can be seen through:
- Historical Anniversaries: Commemorations lead to academic discussions on impact.
- Political Ideologies: Historical differences (gradualism vs. radicalism) invoked in contemporary political discourse.
- Importance of Organizational Unity: Negative consequences often cited in discussions about unity within modern political parties or social movements.
Prelims MCQs
1. UPSC Prelims 2015
Q. The ‘Swadeshi’ and ‘Boycott’ were adopted as methods of struggle for the first time during the:
- (a) Agitation against the Partition of Bengal
- (b) Home Rule Movement
- (c) Non-Cooperation Movement
- (d) Visit of the Simon Commission to India
Ans. (a)
Hint: The Swadeshi and Boycott movements, championed by Extremists, were at the heart of the ideological conflict leading to the Surat Split.
2. UPSC Prelims 2009
Q. The Muslim League was founded at Dacca in 1906 by:
- (a) Muhammad Ali Jinnah
- (b) Aga Khan
- (c) Nawab Salimullah of Dacca
- (d) Syed Ahmed Khan
Ans. (c)
Hint: The formation of the Muslim League in 1906 occurred in the backdrop of the Swadeshi Movement and the growing Moderate-Extremist tensions, with the British encouraging communal organizations to counter the INC.
Mains Questions
1. UPSC Mains 2017
Q. Why did the ‘moderates’ fail to carry conviction with the nation about their proclaimed political objectives?
Direction:
- Discuss limitations of Moderate methods and limited achievements.
- Explain how this led to frustration, rise of Extremism, and eventually the Surat Split.
2. UPSC Mains 2016
Q. The Indian National Congress at its Surat Session in 1907, split into two groups, Extremists and Moderates. What were the issues that led to the split? What was its impact on the national movement?
Direction:
- Issues: Detail ideological differences (goals, methods, pace), controversy over Calcutta resolutions, presidentship dispute.
- Impact: Weakening of Congress, British "rallying moderates, repressing extremists," setback to Swadeshi, rise of revolutionary nationalism, eventual reunion efforts.
3. UPSC Mains (Hypothetical)
Q. "The Surat Split of 1907 was an unfortunate but perhaps inevitable consequence of the diverging political ideologies and aspirations within the Indian National Congress." Comment.
Direction:
- Unfortunate: Discuss negative consequences (weakened movement, British exploitation).
- Inevitable: Analyze deep-seated ideological differences (goals of Swaraj, methods of struggle, faith in British vs. self-reliance).
- Role of Personalities and Circumstances: How specific events acted as triggers, but underlying cause was ideological divergence.
- Conclusion: Argue that while unfortunate, the growing chasm made a split highly probable.
Trend Analysis (UPSC Questioning Style)
- Prelims: Factual recall (year, location, factions, key sessions, consequences).
- Mains: Analytical questions on causes, consequences, critical evaluation (inevitability, impact). Often linked to Swadeshi Movement and Morley-Minto Reforms.
1. Q. The resolutions on Swadeshi, Boycott, National Education, and Self-Government (Swaraj) that became a major point of contention leading to the Surat Split were passed at which session of the Indian National Congress?
- (a) Bombay Session, 1885
- (b) Lahore Session, 1900
- (c) Calcutta Session, 1906
- (d) Surat Session, 1907
Answer: (c)
Explanation: The four compromise resolutions were passed at the Calcutta Session of 1906, presided over by Dadabhai Naoroji. The Extremists feared these would be diluted at the Surat Session.
2. Q. Which of the following was a significant consequence of the Surat Split of 1907?
- (a) The Indian National Congress adopted the goal of Purna Swaraj (complete independence).
- (b) The British government immediately granted significant constitutional reforms to appease all factions.
- (c) The nationalist movement was weakened temporarily, and the British adopted a policy of repressing Extremists while placating Moderates.
- (d) The Muslim League merged with the Indian National Congress to present a united front.
Answer: (c)
Explanation: The Surat Split led to the weakening of the nationalist movement as the Extremists were expelled. The British government then pursued a "carrot and stick" policy, offering limited reforms (Morley-Minto) to Moderates while severely repressing Extremist leaders and activities. Purna Swaraj (a) came much later. Significant reforms (b) were not immediately granted. The Muslim League (d) did not merge; its formation in 1906 reflected growing communal politics.
1. Q. "The Surat Split of 1907 was not merely a clash of personalities but a fundamental divergence in the political ideology and methodology of the two main wings of the Indian National Congress." Analyze the statement.
Key Points/Structure:
- Introduction: Acknowledge the Surat Split and state the question's contention.
- Beyond Personality Clashes: Briefly mention personal differences existed but weren't primary cause.
- Fundamental Divergence in Political Ideology: Goals (Moderates vs. Extremists), Faith in British Rule, Role of Masses, National Pride/Self-Reliance.
- Fundamental Divergence in Methodology: Moderates ("Three P's"), Extremists (Passive Resistance, Boycott, Swadeshi).
- Events Illustrating Divergence: Calcutta resolutions, Surat presidentship issue as manifestations.
- Conclusion: Primacy of ideological differences, reflecting evolving nationalist movement.
2. Q. Evaluate the impact of the Surat Split (1907) on the course of the Swadeshi Movement and the broader Indian nationalist struggle in the subsequent decade.
Key Points/Structure:
- Introduction: Significance of Surat Split and its timing during Swadeshi.
- Impact on Swadeshi Movement: Weakening of Leadership, Decline in Intensity, Lack of Direction, Easier Suppression by British.
- Impact on Broader Nationalist Struggle (1907-1916 approx.): Domination of Moderates in INC, Lull in Mass Political Activity, Rise of Revolutionary Nationalism, British Policy of "Carrot and Stick," Growth of Communalism, Paving the Way for Reunion (Lucknow Pact 1916).
- Conclusion: Significant blow, temporary decline, but ultimately underscored necessity for united front.