A Matter of India

I have been pondering over a TL where Labour is elected in the UK general election in 1924 leading the Geneva Protocols securing a more stable League of Nations and economically integrated Europe. As a consequence the Nazis never get into power with the Socialists hanging onto power during the Depression.

This left the matter of India. With no draining war against Germany and no nationalism boost by the Japanese, would India eventually transform into an independent state as part of the Commonwealth eventually or be granted dominion status and eventual equality in a 'Commonwealth Federation'?
 
India would, eventually. With no Japanese support of Indian Nationalists, we'd be looking at a much later date. I doubt India would be like Canada or Australia (in personal union and all) and would much rather have full independence and the British gone. Now would India be partitioned in this later scenario?

As for no WWII, I'm more curious how the French colonial empire would go. No Dien Bien Phu, and no taking out their frustrations for losing Indochina on Algerian aggitators.
 
I have been pondering over a TL where Labour is elected in the UK general election in 1924 leading the Geneva Protocols securing a more stable League of Nations and economically integrated Europe. As a consequence the Nazis never get into power with the Socialists hanging onto power during the Depression.

This left the matter of India. With no draining war against Germany and no nationalism boost by the Japanese, would India eventually transform into an independent state as part of the Commonwealth eventually or be granted dominion status and eventual equality in a 'Commonwealth Federation'?

Absolutely not either. India was committed to total independence regardless of the war, which only prolonged British rule. Without the war it might have been possible for India to remain undivided (although not likely), but there is just no question of it remaining as part of the British Empire.
 
Absolutely not either. India was committed to total independence regardless of the war, which only prolonged British rule. Without the war it might have been possible for India to remain undivided (although not likely), but there is just no question of it remaining as part of the British Empire.

Actually, after WW1 the Indians wanted dominion status as recognition for the part they played in the Empire's final victory. A large part of the British political establishment however, did not believe that the Indians were capable of self government without a significant preiod of preparation (the exact length of this time varies from individual to individual, but can be measured in decades).

The 1919 Government of India Act clearly states in its preamble that Indian Constitutional Independance (ie Dominion Status) is the ultimate goal. However, the Indians (understandably) wanted it within a few years not a few decades. This can be contrasted sharply with The Government of India Act 1935 (passed by a conservative government) which adhered to the 1919 preamble, but then repealed most of the 1919 act in reality. It was also riddled with safegaurds that allowed the British the ability to interfere at almost every level of government.

India could very well have become a functioning dominion within the Empire, but in order for this to have become a reality, the British political establishment needed to produce a progressive policy that seriously tackled the problem, rather than a few lukewarm dabbles to keep the Indians quiet.
 
Top