Gandhi's Philosophy of War
Raghvendra Pratap Singh
Senior Research Fellow
Department of Defence & Strategic studies
University of Allahabad
Allahabad (U.P.)
India
Abstract
Gandhi’s philosophy of war was closely related to peace. To him, war was an ancient
method of setting vital affairs of mankind through the arbitrament of the sword.
Gandhi did not made the distinction between just and unjust war because every war
was wrong. In developing the concept he discusses the various causes of war. In the
light of philosophy of war Gandhi did made an attempt to examine the concept of
national security and the role of technology in the development of state prosperity. The
author has also examined the relationship between technology and economic
development.
Key Words: just war, nationalism, imperialism, national security, technology, non-use
of force, non-violent army.
Introduction
The origin of Gandhi's thinking on war is deeply related to his general
philosophy of peace. Curiosity exists among the scholars that what made Gandhi to
comprehend on the meaning of the term "war."
www.ijellh.com
484
Gandhi's view on war was greatly influenced by Hindu text, Bhagwat Gita. To
him, the Gita deals with a person's duty in time of crisis. It is not a historical discourse
but it merely uses physical illustration to drive home a spiritual truth1. He maintained
that war described in the Gita was "not a war between cousins but between the two
natures in us, good and the evil.”In this process, good triumps over the evil. To
comment that Gita preaches violence or justifies war, was in Gandhi" He was convinced
that the Gita neither advocates war nor condemns violence. How Gandhi interpreted
the Gita becomes important because it gave an opportunity to under-stand the nature of
war and peace.
Gandhiji defined war as "an ancient method of setting vital affairs of mankind
through the arbitrament of the sword." Gandhi wrote." In 1920 I became a rebel. Since
then, the conviction has been growing upon me that things of fundamental important to
the people are not secured by reason alone but have to be purchased with their
suffering. Suffering is the law of human being; war is the law of the jungle. But
suffering is infinitely more than the law of the jungle.... suffering is the badge of human
race, not the sword."2
Again, on the question of war, Gandhi did not accepted the distinction between
just and unjust war because for him every war was wrong.3 He believed that every war
resulted in immense violence including the just war. Thus, Gandhian approach seems to
be indefensible. He associated himself with those who thought just war was fought
purely on ideological ground. For example, he supported western democracies in their
armed struggle against the Fascists and Nazis in World War II. But in doing so, he
vehemently opposed the use of violence for the sake of just war. Here emotionalism
www.ijellh.com
485
played a part in Gandhi's life because he believed in the solution of crisis through nonviolent means, whatever the situation would have been.
In this way Gandhi rejected the distinction made between "just" and "unjust"
wars. Here his approach was quite different from Thoreau's Civil disobedience.
Thoreau' work is related to his reaction to the Mexican War of 1848. In the Mexican
War, he refused to pay the poll tax and advised the others to do the same thing because
the money was collected for the wrong cause.4 Gandhi opposed this method of boycott.
He said "If I have only a choice between paying for the army of soldiers to kill my
neighbours, or to be a soldier myself, I would as I must consistently with my creed
enlist as a solder in the hope of controlling of violence and even converting my
comrades.5
Infect, Gandhi's perception towards war quite different from pacifist thinkers.
War, to him, was a natural outcome of his own thinking and experience. So far pacifists
were concerned, they emphasied on the "negation of war," while Gandhi war primarily
concerned with human dignity in all its aspects. Therefore, Gandhi's emphasis was on
experiments with truth and it was based on non-violence, the relationship of means and
ends and self-suffering. It showed the influence of the Gita on his political and military
writings. In Gita, the theme of Krishna's discourse to Arjun is "action alone is the
province... nor should thou desire to avoid action province.... nor should thou desire to
avoid action."6
Unlike pacifists, history and the contemporary situation led Gandhi to reassess
that "war will always be with us. There seems to be no possibility of the whole human
nature becoming transformed. Moksha and Ahimsha are for individuals to attain. Full
practice of ahimsa is inconsistent with the possession of wealth, land or rearing of
www.ijellh.com
486
children. There is real ahimsa in defending my wife and children even at the risk of
striking down the wrongdoer. It is perfect ahimsa not to strike him but intervene to
receive his blows..... India did neither on the field of Plessey. We were a cowardly mob
warring against one another, hungry for the company's silver.... There was no ahimsa in
their miserable performance notwithstanding examples of personal bravery."7
Citing many examples of battles as described in the Ramayan and Mahabharat,
Gandhi told his friend Dinabandhu C.F. Andrews that Indians had always been
warlike. The hymn composed by Tulsidas in praise of Rama gives first priority to his
ability to strike down the enemy. Buddhism had miserable failed because it advocated
forbearance and during the Muslim invasion Indian were not any less eager than
enemies to fight. Under the British rule, the arms had to be renounced compulsorily but
the fighting spirit had died down. Moreover, Gandhi said that he had never asked
Indians" let us go and kill the Germans," all he had said was" let us go and die for the
sake of India and the empire.
Causes of war
According to Gandhi causes of war could be enumerated as follows:
Economic cause: Gandhi believed that economic factor was one of the causes of war. It
meant the exploitation of people and areas. Greed and resort to violence were the basic
economic cause of war. Citing the examples of the Opium War and the conduct of the
British East India Company, Gandhi said, "What was the object of the Opium war with
China? If China produced her own opium, the Opium war would not have been waged.
Students of history know that if was a war of blind self-interest on the part of England."8
Similarly in Hind Swaraj, Gandhi was quite clear about the real intention of the
British East India Company. The company was well versed in commerce and war, its
www.ijellh.com
487
object was to increase its commerce and to make money. In order to protect the
commerce it employed the army. Napoleon has once said that "England was a notion of
shopkeepers.” They hold whatever domain they have for the sake of their commerce.
Their army and navy were intended to protect it.9
The exploitation of the people and areas were cited by Gandhi in the form of
Boer War and the Zule uprising. He disagreed with the Marxian view that economic
factor was the sole cause and source of all evil. It was not correct to trace the origin of all
wars to economic cause nor did he realise that wars were an inevitable results of the
institution of private property in capitalist systems. The predominant aim, then, seemed
to be money and destruction. "War has become a matter of money and resourcefulness
in inventing weapons of destruction. It is no longer a matter of personal bravery or
endurance. “Science and technology has resulted in modern machinery which was
responsible for bloodshed in wars. According to Gandhi, the machine age was
responsible for the organised murder during the first world war Asphyiating gas a and
such other abominations have not advanced us by an inch.10
Imperialism: Another important cause of war was imperialism. Speaking to an
American in 1940, Gandhi Asked:
"Why is there war today, if it is not for the
satisfaction of the desire to share the spoils/ These large holdings (imperialist
possessions of western democracies) cannot be sustained except by violence, veiled if
not open. Western democracy as it factions today is diluted Nazism or Fascism. At best,
it is merely a clock to hide the Nazi and Fascist tendencies of imperialism.11
Nationalism: Gandhi also believed that nationalism to certain extent could be a
cause of war. The narrowness, selfishness and exclusiveness of nationalism made it
pernicious and vile in his opinion. He made a sarcastic remark on Italian and German
www.ijellh.com
488
nationalism and regarded as parochial and vicious. He even considered fascism and
National Socialism to be mainly disruptive forces in world affairs. Regarding Hitler's
nationalism, Gandhi felt that the tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to
have gone. He was propounding a new religion of exclusive and militant nationalism in
the name of which any inhumanity becomes an act of humanity to be rewarded here
and hereafter."12
Such type of nationalism, Gandhi thought, was a form of tyranny that was
perhaps unprecedented in history. There was no hope of survival of democracy under
them. Similarly, he criticised the idea of Soviet nationalism which was not conducive to
peace. Gandhi feared the Russian dictatorship posed a major challenge to the whole
world. "Russia has a dictator who dreams of peace and thinks he will wade to it
through a sea of blood. No one can say what Russian dictatorship will mean to the
world. "13 Gandhi felt that the Russian dictatorship would create chaos and it seems that
this ruthlessness will create anarchy, worse than we have ever seen. Thus, nationalism
in its narrow sense meant selfishness and was as dangerous and deplorable as
imperialism.
Futility of war
In 1928, Gandhi was faced with the problem of war not simply as a thing but an
institution in which he took part as a non-combatant. He knew that war was wrong and
an unmitigated evil. He was of the firm opinion that freedom won through bloodshed
of fraud was no freedom. This idea was deeply influenced by Vyasa's great epic in
order to depict the futility of war. “The epic showed how Lord Krishna, the invincible
Arjun and the Dharmaraja Yudhisthra were eventually decimated, weakened to
impotence or condemned to perdition.” To Gandhi, the Gita proved to be the "utter
www.ijellh.com
489
nothingness of earthly power." The Gita has also shown the world" the futility of war by
giving its victors an empty glory." The Gita preaching was well understood by Gandhi
during the Second World War. He felt that" Personally I think the end of this giant war
will be what happened in the fabled Mahabharat war.....what is described in that great
epic is happening today with such furry and ferocity that the end will be mutual
exhaustion. The victor will share the fate that awaited the surviving Pandavas."14
As such Gandhi saw war with all its glorification as brute force. It demoralizes
those who are trained for it. It brutalises men of naturally gentle character. It outrages
every beautiful canon of morality. Its path of glory is foul with passions of lust and red
with the blood of murder.15
Adlai Stevenson had once said war as containing the possibility of escalation into
annihilation of all or most of mankind. In the words of General Douglas Mac Arthur,
the utility of modern war was its complete failure as an arbiter of international
dissension." Further, Eisenhower made an observation on "The sterile, stupid business
of war and preparation for war. Similarly, Nehru's testimony on the futility of violence
speaks of "The lesson of history, the long, course of history and more especially the
lesson of the last two great wars which have devastated humanity. It has been that out
of hatred and violence, only hatred and violence will come."
In Gandhi's eyes, the greatest problem that the country faces was the sense of
war's futility or at least its dreadful cost and the fear of risking unilateral abandonment.
This question perplexed even Gandhi as he was that nations should learn the lesson of
humility from the futile wars and crumbling empires of history. Napoleon planned
continental empire but found himself in prison at St. Helena. The great Kaiser of
www.ijellh.com
490
Germany aimed at the crown of Europe but he was reduced to the status of a private
gentleman.
National Security
Over the years, the national security issues have caught the attention of scholars
all over the world. Security of a state, as visualized by some, is concerned with
protecting its way of life, social and economic well being and preserving internal
harmony. While in military term, it implies defense against territorial aggression from
which ever direction it may come from be it land, air or sea. Security relates to all
aspects of nationalism, regionalism and internationalism. Generally security could be
defined as "freedom from danger or fear of attack."16
Security is often related with the establishment and maintenance of peace.
Kautilya described peace as" a period during which the vanquished is preparing for and
the victor exploiting for an imminent next round.17 A nation's Security is also depended
upon her geopolitical status, demography, national resources, defence and foreign
policy, external threat perceptions, internal security affected by internal dissensions and
externally fostered acts, national morale and will power to defend its national interest.
Gandhi and Non-use of Force: Security could be achieved by two ways: (1) use
of force and (2) non use of force. So for Gandhi was concerned, he build the concept of
security by non-use of force. John Nevin Sayre, while writhing on security articulated
that "pacifism, first of all, asks people to consider whether national armament can really
be Conducive security in a civilization which was the tools of 20th century science. In the
world in which we live and in the decades immediately ahead it is open to the double
objection of (1) mounting cost (2) diminishing effectiveness for defence. 18 He further
says that the machine of war have to be tended by man. The Munitions of war have to
www.ijellh.com
491
be manufactured by men and approach is being made more and more toward the
drafting of industry and of whole population but by relatively small part of any people.
Today, military strategists plan to conscript the activity of the entire manpower of a
nation. Thus, he sums by saying that" armed preparedness is a huge cost in the present
and for the future it is mounting.19
Defence Preparedness: The pertinent questions is "can expenditures on
armament increase the security of a country?" or "What is preparedness?" Senator Borah
drew the attention by emphasizing on huge public debts and constantly increasing tax
burdens which government has put on their people throughout the world. He said "the
things with which government will have to contend in the future are the people. A big
armament programme will bring problems. It will not be preparedness for that which
accentuates economic distress is unprepared ness.20
Gandhi asked is this the method of defending ourselves? Even if we do, have we
got the financial ability? Copying American or England would increase the expenditure
ten-fold. He said that nation cannot be kept on the non-violent path by violence. On the
question of violent army, he perceived that "A violent army will not have its arms for
show but for definitely destructive purposes." A non-violent body will have no use for
such weapons and will, therefore, bear its sword into plough shares and spears into
pruning hook and will shrink from the thought of using them as lethal weapons.
It is quite interesting to note the speech delivered by the Commander-in-Chief of
the Defence Force in India on the 5th institution. There is passage which states" India is a
military country and I am a soldier. It will, therefore, perhaps not to be amiss if I give
you some personal impressions of what the effect of modernization is likely to give
increased impetus to the already high rate of education in the Indian army; and when
www.ijellh.com
492
nearly every solider on discharge returns to his home with a knowledge of motor cars
and machinery, there may will be a perceptible effect upon the age old method of
agriculture and ways of living. Modernization in the army may, therefore, have a
considerable indirect effect upon the life of India."21
Non-Violent Army: Gandhi rejected this view that India is a military country.
"For me defence forces are of the least importance in the make-up of the nation. From
ages past India has had a military caste in numbers wholly insignificant. That cast has
had little to do with the millions. All it want to state that India as a military country is
wrong. "In this way, he discarded the assumption of violent army which may not only
have its arms for show but for destructive purposes. Gandhi's best approach to the idea
of an army was that of a "non-violent army". It was different from the usual violence
oriented organization. The focus was on in the nature of the discipline that his nonviolent army would observe and emulate. The discipline would come from within the
solider rather tan from without. The soldier of the usual army would yield obedience
whilst at war and a non-violent soldier would carry discipline in his heart and would
carry an atmosphere of restraint in every walk of life.
Further, if India comes to her own demonstrably through violent means, India
will then need a vast army, grand navy and grenadier air force. But if her consciousness
rises to the height necessary to give her a nonviolent victory in her struggle for freedom
the world values will be changed and the paraphernalia of war would be found to be
useful. Such was the opinion of Gandhi that India would become free through nonviolence.
Gandhi's doctrine of non-violence was tested in 1947 when Indian troops sent to
Kashmir to check tribal invaders from Pakistan and Gandhi approved the sending of
www.ijellh.com
493
the troops. He wrote: "my resistance to war does not carry me to the point of thwarting
those who wish to take part in it. I reason with them. I put before them the better way
and leave them to make the choice."22
Social and Economic Defence: Paul Wehr's emphasis on "Social defence as a
concept originated in the ethical principals of the Gandhism movement and in pacifist
movement." The Gandhism movement demonstrated the heaviness of non cooperation
with an occupying force, i.e., Britain. It became quite evident that the outcome of
modern war was more and more destructive. It was, but natural that the principle and
techniques of Gandhian non cooperation would be applied to national defence." Gandhi
believed that man is a social being. Without inter-relationship with society on society
teaches him the lesson of humanity."23 At first, social defence research was nongovernmental. But by the 1970's government were supporting it and political parties
and peace movements were debating it.
Decentralization of the socio-economic system is another basic factor of national
security Gandhi correlated this aspect to his own concept of ahimsa. Gandhi's idea on
decentralization is totally different from those western countries where power remains
with the centralized authority. Decentralization, to him, was meant to give strength to
groups to resist exploitation and unfairness. He did not give too much importance to
prevalent centralized units which were too large for people's participation, initiative
and sharing. Gandhi, therefore, laid emphasis on evolution of independence and
development from the grass roots level and then it should move upward. To quote him,
"independence must begin at the bottom. Thus, every village has to be self-sustained
and capable of managing its affairs even to the extent of defending itself against the
www.ijellh.com
494
whole world. It will be trained and prepared to perish in the attempt to defend itself
against any onslaught form without."
As discussed earlier, a peaceful socio-economic order will be possible only when
the masses gain the strength to resist injustice and exploitation. This strength will come
through decentralization, new motivations, newer life style and right type of dedicated
leadership. Gandhi said "non-violence with its technique of Satyagarh and noncooperation will be the sanction of the village communities." He had no faith in the
increasing power of state because it" represent violence in a concentrated and organized
from. " Hence, he laid down the maxim that " our capacity for Swaraj depends upon
capacity for solving without reference to or intervention of the government , all the
varied and complex problem that must arise in the affairs of one of the biggest and the
most ancient nations like ours."
Technology: It became important for Gandhi to analyze it as an essential
attribute of national security; Various studies have focused on the consequences of the
technological developments i.e. automation on the economic and social life of a nation/
Automation has been defined as a "Technique of industrial production combined with
the method of processing data introduced since the second world war, with the aid of
the most advanced techniques and devices but with certain economic limitations. This
method of production attempts to perform by machinery all the functions hitherto
performed by human beings. The machines are controlled by machines.24
The supporters of this new technological development believe in the principle
that automation is natural concommitant of changes in the technique of production
introduced by industrial revolution. As such automation will not adversely affect the
social and economic life of the nation. On the possibility of automation becoming a
www.ijellh.com
495
grave problem to the stability of economic and social structure of society, Pollock has
focused on the following assumptions:
 Automation will tend to promote technological unemployment.
 Economic stability may be disturbed if the demand for ever increasing
production is not forthcoming.
 It would result into vast competitive race to speed up production of more
and more in automatic factories.
 Such an approach would not create a feeling of plenty but a feeling of
dissatisfaction.
 Technological development
would
be
an
important
factor
in
strengthening the position of the big concerns as against the medium
sized and small business and would further encourage concentration of
financial control over the production and distribution of goods and
services.
Conclusion
In view of the above stated proposition, is it possible to develop a truly free and
democratic state under the garb of technological development where the people will be
the cornerstone of the socio-economic set-up? The need for clear and careful thinking is
important in India where we are on the threshold of vast planned economic
development. People in the west are still in a dilemma that modern technology will not
lead to social evils but will build a society where justice and equality will become the
order of the day.
www.ijellh.com
496
Gandhi's perception of modern technology was different from the above stated
western argument. He believed too much mechanization would be harmful to the
development of individual and the nation. "Industrialism is, I am afraid, going to be a
curse for manking."25 Following the western model and method of technology would
affect the spirit of the people, particularly the poor people. Therefore, he stressed on the
principle that the future economic organization must not be developed upon the
exploitation of the masses and of villages. What he wanted was that the villages must
become self-sufficient. Hence, he was afraid of the western type of industrialization. He
believed that independent India can only discharge her duty properly by adopting a
simple method by developing thousand of cottages and living at peace with the world.26
This does not mean that Gandhi was against machinery as such. For him, the
spinning which was a delicate piece of machinery meant for the good and not for the
exclusive profit of the few people. Under Gandhi's scheme, therefore, "men in charge of
machinery will think not of themselves or even of the nation to which they belong but
of the whole human race."
27
So, he was not fighting against machinery as such but the
madness of thinking that the machinery would save labour. What he wanted was to
secure employment and livelihood not only to a part of the human race but for all. On
the other hand, automation and production would lead to concentration of power and
wealth in the hand of few people and in such a socio-economic set-up the common
people will be the sufferers.
Gandhi believed by promoting village welfare, the exploitation of the masses
would be Minimum. Industrialization on a mass scale would lead to passive or active
exploitation of the villagers because of the tendency of competition and marketing. It
was, thus, remained that villages must be self contained. Provided this character of the
www.ijellh.com
497
village industry being maintained then there would be no objection to villages using
even modern machines and tools. It should not be used as a means of exploiting others.
Again and again, Gandhi stressed on the need of the localization of both consumption
and production. Once this happens then all the problems of present day economic
system would come to an end. The evil cannot be remedied by suggesting that
distribution should become more equitable. On the other hand, distribution can be
equalized when production is localized i.e. when distribution is simultaneous with
production.
www.ijellh.com
498
References:
1.
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, New Delhi, Vol. 15, pp. 312-313
2.
Ibid, Vol. 16, p. 553, Vol. 48, p. 189
3.
Harijan, Vol. 8, p. 250
4.
C. Seshachari, Gandhi and the American Scene, Bombay, 1969, p. 19
5.
Collected Works, Vol. 42, p. 437
6.
Mahadev Desai, The Gita According to Gandhi, Ahmedabad, 1956, pp. 128,
161
7.
Collected Works, Vol. 14, pp. 509-10
8.
Ibid, Vol. 15. p. 487
9.
Hind Swaraj, pp. 28-29
10.
Collected Works, Vol. 41. p. 310
11.
Harijan, Vol. 18, p. 129
12.
Ibid, Vol. 6, p. 352
13.
Ibid, p. 290
14.
Harijan, Vol. 9, p. 40
15.
Collected, Works, Vol. 9. p. 471
16.
Kenneth Twitchett, International Security : Reflection on Survival and
Stability, Oxford University Press, London, 1971, pp. 4-5
17.
Rama Sastry, Kautilya Arthshastra, Wesleyan Mission Press, Mysore, 1923, p.
10
18.
John Nevin Sayre, Pacifism and National Security, Gandhi Essential Writings
(ed) V.V. Ramana Murti, Gandhian Peace Foundation, New Delhi, 1970, p.
430
www.ijellh.com
499
19.
Ibid, p. 431
20.
Ibid
21.
V.V. Ramana (ed) pp 438-39
22.
Harijan, August 8, 1940, p. 250
23.
Young India, 21.3.1929, p. 93
24.
See Pollock, Economic and Social Consequences of Automaton
25.
Young India, 1931, p. 351
26.
Harijan, 1946, p. 285
27.
Young India, 1953, p. 321
www.ijellh.com
500