1940, War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression entered a stalemate. Prior to this, in order to reverse the deadlock in China, Japan has decided to continue to invest a large number of troops in China, and at the same time set out to make plans to capture Nanyang. The focus of the attack was Indo-China Peninsula, from which Japan tried to cut off the foreign supply line on the way to China, threatening the southwest of China's anti-Japanese rear area.
Indian zhina Peninsula is a colony of French and British. By this time, France had surrendered to Germany and Britain had declared war on Japan. Therefore, Japan's strategic shift not only threatens China's rear area, but also is extremely unfavorable to Britain. So, in Japan? Matchmaking? Then China and Britain came together closely, which directly contributed to the later Chinese expeditionary force fighting in Myanmar.
After the National Government decided to help Britain fight, it quickly sent a delegation to India to discuss relevant matters with the British colonial authorities. Britain was also eager for the arrival of the China delegation, because in addition to the pressure brought by Japan, Britain was also facing internal pressure, and the biggest internal pressure was the independence movement led by Gandhi at that time.
India at this time became very embarrassed because of the existence of the British government and Gandhi.
Why do you say that? Because India was still a British colony at that time, Britain had declared war on Japan on behalf of India before that, but Gandhi's position in the hearts of the Indian people was also very high. What did he advocate at this time? Nonviolence? In other words, we should not seek for peace through extreme violence. To put it bluntly, don't fight!
If Gandhi's ideas can be understood before this, we can only say that his ideas are too naive in the face of an unprecedented world war.
In fact, Gandhi's idea is good. He doesn't want any more bloodshed and killing in this world, and the people and the country can live in peace for a long time. However, the reality is that the fascist groups with Japan, Germany and Italy as the core will never give up their weapons and ambitions because of Gandhi's words. What they want is to carve up the whole world and rule all mankind, and to achieve this goal, it is bound to bring more bloodshed and killing.
But Gandhi has never personally experienced the bloodshed and killing caused by fascist countries, so his thoughts are doomed to change, because he only believes what he sees.
However, the people of China have been bullied by Japan for many years, and the people of China are being brutally killed by Japan. So the British hope that China people can convince Gandhi with their own personal experience and persuade him to temporarily put down his hostility towards the British authorities at this critical moment of World War II? Nonviolence? And advocate independence, can temporarily cooperate with the British to prepare for the coming things? A bloody affair? .
But obviously, the British miscalculated and underestimated Gandhi's persistence in his long-standing ideas. When Dai, head of the China delegation, visited Gandhi to explain the difficult situation of China's anti-Japanese war, Gandhi said something that surprised everyone so far and made everyone unbelievable. He said:
In any case, China does not practise non-violence. Being brave in resisting Japan shows that China has never been willing to be non-violent. It's just self-defense, not a reason from the principle of non-violence. From the standpoint of non-violence, I must say that it is inappropriate for China, with a population of 400 million, to use civilized Japan to deal with it, or to use the same means as the Japanese to resist Japanese aggression. If China people have my belief in non-violence, they don't need the latest means of destruction like the Japanese. China can tell the Japanese. Come with your means of destruction, we will give you 200 million people, but we will not give in to the remaining 200 million people. ? If China really does this, the Japanese will become slaves of China.
I don't know how to make a correct explanation for this passage. After all, my understanding may misunderstand this world-class figure. Great man? As far as I know, Gandhi's words mean that China's war of resistance a few years ago was meaningless, and the people of China could completely give up their resistance and finally win an illusory victory at the expense of 200 million people.
However, will the Japanese really surrender voluntarily after killing 200 million people in China and become China people, as Gandhi said? Slave? Really? I believe that people all over China will not believe it, because the cruelty of the Japanese has long been deeply imprinted in our hearts and indelible! Gandhi took this conclusion for granted, but we are using the lives of thousands of compatriots to prove his conclusion wrong!
I have to say that Gandhi's words surprised the British and Chinese people. At that time, the people of China not only made their own sacrifices for peace in China and the world, but all this was meaningless to Gandhi just because he advocated it? Nonviolence? .
However, when a person gives up resistance first when facing a violent, cold-blooded and inhuman enemy, can he really let the other person let go? History has proved countless times that this method doesn't work.
Compared with Gandhi's nonviolence? I believe more? Political power comes from the barrel of a gun? .
1942, just two years after Gandhi made that shocking statement, the Chinese expeditionary force entered Myanmar and finally won the war against Japan in a foreign country. At the same time, Gandhi was imprisoned by the British authorities for launching many independence movements.
More ironically, during Gandhi's imprisonment, the Japanese Burmese army launched a war against Impal, India. Although it ended in the defeat of the Japanese army, Indian soldiers and civilians also made great sacrifices.
Reminiscent of what Gandhi said to Dai before, I wonder how Gandhi would feel when he learned that the Japanese army had attacked India?
In fact, if we analyze the situation in India at that time, Gandhi's original idea can't be said to be absolutely wrong, because Gandhi's ultimate goal was to strive for India's independence, so in Gandhi's mind at that time, the British authorities were his greatest enemy, so Gandhi advocated? Nonviolence? In a sense, this is not a compromise to Japan, but a threat to Britain. If Britain promised India independence, Gandhi could join the allied camp against Japanese fascism.
So, in this case, Gandhi naturally didn't want China to cooperate with Britain and stood on the side of Britain. If analyzed from this aspect, Gandhi is just a very clever politician. What does he stand for? Nonviolence? It is only a means to realize its political ambition.