Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill | Commons
Text Size:

The recent flap over Winston Churchill — with Labour politician John McDonnell calling Britain’s most revered prime minister a “villain” and prompting a rebuke from the latter’s grandson — will astonish many Indians. That’s not because the label itself is a misnomer, but because McDonnell was exercised by the death of one Welsh miner in 1910. In fact, Churchill has the blood of millions on his hands whom the British prefer to forget.

“History,” Churchill himself said, “will judge me kindly, because I intend to write it myself.” He did, penning a multi-volume history of World War Two, and won the Nobel Prize for Literature for his self-serving fictions. As the Australian Prime Minister Robert Menzies remarked of the man many Britons credit with winning the war, “His real tyrant is the glittering phrase, so attractive to his mind that awkward facts have to give way.”

Awkward facts, alas, there are aplenty. As McDonnell correctly noted, Churchill as Home Secretary in 1910 sent battalions of police from London and ordered them to attack striking miners in Tonypandy in South Wales; one was killed and nearly 600 strikers and policemen were injured. It’s unlikely this troubled his conscience much. He later assumed operational command of the police during a siege of armed Latvian anarchists in Stepney, where he decided to allow them to be burned to death in a house where they were trapped.

Shortly afterward, during the fight for Irish independence between 1918-23, Churchill was one of the few British officials in favor of bombing Irish protesters from the air, suggesting using “machine gun fire bombs” to scatter them. As Secretary of State for the Colonies, he followed through on that threat in Iraq. He ordered large-scale bombing of Mesopotamia in 1921, with an entire village wiped out in 45 minutes. When some British officials objected to his proposal for “the use of gas against natives,” he found their objections “unreasonable.” In fact he argued that poison gas was more humane than outright extermination: “The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum.”

This underscores the fundamental contrast in views of Churchill. In Britain and much of the West, he’s seen as the savior of “Democracy, Freedom, and all that is good in Western Civilization,” as one enthusiastic correspondent put it. In fact, his record is far more mixed even there. Throughout the 1920s and early 1930s, Churchill was an open admirer of Mussolini, declaring that the Italian Fascist movement had “rendered a service to the whole world.” Traveling to Rome in 1927 to express his admiration for the Fascist Duce, Churchill announced that he “could not help being charmed, like so many other people have been, by Signor Mussolini’s gentle and simple bearing and by his calm detached poise in spite of so many burdens and dangers.”

What Churchill was above all, though, was a committed imperialist — one determined to preserve the British Empire not just by defeating the Nazis but much else besides. At the start of his career, as a young cavalry officer on the northwest frontier of India, he declared the Pashtuns needed to recognize “the superiority of [the British] race” and that those who resisted would “be killed without quarter.” He wrote happily about how he and his comrades “systematically, village by village, destroyed the houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive devastation. Every tribesman caught was speared or cut down at once.”

In Kenya, Churchill either directed or was complicit in policies involving the forced relocation of local people from the fertile highlands to make way for white colonial settlers and the incarceration of over 150,000 men, women and children in concentration camps. British authorities used rape, castration, lit cigarettes on tender spots and electric shocks to torture Kenyans under Churchill’s rule.

And his principal victims were the Indians — “a beastly people with a beastly religion,” as he charmingly called us, a “foul race.” Churchill was an appalling racialist, one who could not bring himself to see any people of color as entitled to the same rights as himself. (He “did not admit,” for instance, “that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia … by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race, has come in and taken its place.”) He fantasized luridly of having Mahatma Gandhi tied to the ground and trampled upon by elephants.

Thanks to Churchill’s personal decisions, more than 3 million Bengalis died of hunger in a 1943 famine. Churchill deliberately ordered the diversion of food from starving Indian civilians to well-supplied British soldiers and even to top up European stockpiles, meant for yet-to-be-liberated Greeks and Yugoslavs. “The starvation of anyway underfed Bengalis is less serious” than that of “sturdy Greeks,” he argued. When reminded of the suffering of Bengalis, his response was typically Churchillian: The famine was the Indians’ own fault, he said, for “breeding like rabbits.” If the suffering was so dire, he wrote on the file, “Why hasn’t Gandhi died yet?”

It’s important to remember that these weren’t enemies in a war — Churchill also wanted to “drench the cities of the Ruhr” in poison gas and said of the Japanese, “we shall wipe them out, every one of them, men, women and children” — but British subjects. Nor can his views be excused as being reflective of their times; his own Secretary of State for War, Leo Amery, confessed that he could see very little difference between Churchill’s attitude and Hitler’s.

Britons and Oscar voters may yet thrill to Churchill’s stirring words about freedom. But to the descendants of the Iraqis whom Churchill gassed and the Greek protesters on the streets of Athens who were mowed down on his orders in 1944 (killing 28 and maiming 120), to sundry Pashtuns and Irish, to Afghans and Kenyans and Welsh miners as well as to Indians like myself, it will always be a mystery why a few bombastic speeches have been enough to wash the bloodstains off Churchill’s hands. We shall remember him as a war criminal and an enemy of decency and humanity, a blinkered imperialist untroubled by the oppression of non-white peoples, a man who fought not to defend but to deny our freedom. -Bloomberg

Shashi Tharoor, an Indian MP, is the author of 18 books, including “Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India.” 


Also read: Even an Indian ‘Anglophile’ can see that Britain must get used to being a small country


Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

Why news media is in crisis & How you can fix it

India needs free, fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism even more as it faces multiple crises.

But the news media is in a crisis of its own. There have been brutal layoffs and pay-cuts. The best of journalism is shrinking, yielding to crude prime-time spectacle.

ThePrint has the finest young reporters, columnists and editors working for it. Sustaining journalism of this quality needs smart and thinking people like you to pay for it. Whether you live in India or overseas, you can do it here.

Support Our Journalism

VIEW COMMENTS

11 COMMENTS

  1. So many I’ll educated biased articles like this.
    Written by racists with an agenda but not educated enough to know the facts.
    My favourite they roll out is the poison gas one. How he wanted to drop poison gas the evil man. The reality? He was telling them to use non lethal gas to disperse people rather than bombing them. Ohh my.. But that does r fit the lies that people try to spout.

  2. Please explain how 1,500,000 Bengalis dies in a famine — in 1974, long after Britain (and Churchill) had gone.

  3. Agree with the author. Please read “ Churchill’s Secret War” by Madhushree Mukerjee. Mukherjee in this book has provided incontrovertible evidence how Churchill contributed to deaths three million Indians in the Bengal famine in the 1940s.

  4. India is also seeing the same thing. Reservation based ethnic cleansing in the guise of Social Justice propagated by caste mafias of Bihar, TN etc. What else can you make of every just and fair decision of the Supreme Court has been overturned under the oppression and terror of caste mafias masquerading as protectors of ‘backward’.

  5. Haha.
    Very funny.
    Elephants would have refused to trample on him as they did to Buddha!
    But Churchill is excused for drinking too much, not Tharoor!

  6. Churchill was a racist and a evil man. But he did what was right for his country!

    I wish some of our politcians were more stone hearted and wise especially when dealing with our adversaries. Had Nehru not been a blind idealist ( some would say stupid) and not so weak in the knees we perhaps wouldn’t have had the Kashmir and Pakistan problem and the Chinese would have thought twice before they did what they did. He almost abandoned NEFA (Arunachal and other areas)

    The same way Shashtri ambivilance resulted in us not going for the kill and taking Lahore in battle and later giving away Hajipir pass in peace talks which we captured against all odds.
    But perhaps the greatest stupidity was shown by Mrs Indira Gandhi who gave away 90000 Paki POWs on Bhuttos verbal assurance that he will eventually work out a solution. This stupidity perhaps has no equivalent in morden diplomatic history!

    There are many other great examples of stupid statecraft like I K Gujaral unilaterally disbanded RAW operations in Pakistan. The Various Bus rides by Atal Bihari, were led mostly by his heart and not by real politik!

    Shashi Tharoor, a seemingly an intelligent man, though thoroughly gullible, following a family with dubious reputation and getting swayed by their name ignoring their deeds.

    Coming back to Churchill, he was very clear that all his actions were in the interst of his country. We need that kind of wisdoms in our leaders instead of the usual Lill livered emotional peaceniks.

    A verse from the Panchtantra : “an arrow hits the body and no more, wisdom strikes at the very root, destroys family, fame, fortune and sovereignty

    We need are leaders to have this wisdom!

  7. In fact the same can be said of Christopher Columbus. Today, his actions would be termed as genocide and ethnic cleansing.

  8. May well be true. However, the British rate him as one of their greatest individuals over the last five hundred years. Led a battered, bruised nation through the Secone World War, to eventual victory. Consider his current successor, unable to lead Britain out of the EU in orderly fashion.

    • A quick thought…..if Hitler won and Churchill lost world war II….what kind of history we would be reading….a white washed Hitler with all the Jewish massacre hidden in closet and only glorifying his success stories in war

Comments are closed.