Nehru: The Invention of India, a biography of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru by Shashi Tharoor, first published by Arcade Publishing in 2003 and later by Penguin India in 2018, has assumed renewed relevance given the ongoing informed and uninformed debates and bickering over the life and legacy of India’s first Prime Minister (1947–1964). Tharoor offers a balanced assessment of Jawaharlal Nehru—the man and his work—without undue eulogy or unfounded criticism.
Born into an aristocratic family and supported by his resourceful and indulgent father, Motilal Nehru, a renowned lawyer based in Allahabad (today’s Prayagraj), Jawaharlal Nehru was educated at the prestigious institutions of Harrow and Cambridge in England. Returning from England with a law degree, he was drawn to anti-colonialism and the freedom struggle, initially through the influence of his father, who was himself a member of the Indian National Congress. Subsequently, inspired by Mahatma Gandhi, his involvement in the freedom movement deepened, and the struggle for India’s independence became the foremost mission of his life. Under Gandhi’s influence, he emerged from his life of luxury to work tirelessly among the masses, cheerfully accepting all the hardships that accompanied it. Imprisoned several times by the British colonial rulers for his leadership in India’s non-violent freedom struggle, he never bargained for concessions, choosing instead to serve his full prison terms rather than accept offers of early release. He used these periods of incarceration to write scholarly works, including Glimpses of World History and The Discovery of India.
Though united by anti-colonialism, members of the Congress Party represented diverse ideological orientations. The party included moderates and militants, leftists, centrists, and even those with right-wing leanings. Nehru, despite being a leftist himself, often conceded space to others to keep the party united.
Following the Government of India Act of 1935, elections to the Provincial Assemblies were held in 1937, in which the Congress Party won majorities in most provinces and subsequently formed ministries. When the Second World War broke out in 1939, disagreements with the British government over the terms of India’s support for Britain’s war effort led Nehru and the Congress Working Committee to resolve that Congress provincial governments should resign. According to Tharoor, this was a grave mistake, as the move inadvertently created a political vacuum that the Muslim League exploited to strengthen itself and its demand for a separate Pakistan.
During the difficult years of 1947–49, as Nehru was still finding his feet as Prime Minister of a Partition-devastated, refugee-laden, newly independent nation, he often went along with what Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, the Deputy Prime Minister, and Lord Mountbatten, the Governor-General, wanted on crucial issues. However, on the question of Kashmir, the views of the two leaders differed, and Nehru committed some “blunders” by following Mountbatten’s advice. While Mountbatten was instrumental in securing the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India, he also persuaded Nehru to declare a ceasefire in 1947 and refer the Kashmir issue to the United Nations. Later, Nehru granted Jammu and Kashmir special constitutional status in the hope of winning the loyalty of the Kashmiris and their leader, Sheikh Abdullah, a decision that further complicated the Kashmir issue for decades.
The establishment of democratic institutions, the conduct of largely free and fair nationwide elections based on universal adult suffrage, and the deepening of parliamentary processes were among the major political achievements of independent India. Nehru’s leading role in these achievements is undeniable.
Personally, Nehru was a rationalist and a great admirer of science. He zealously championed the cause of scientific temper. In matters of religion, he was an agnostic and had little patience for religious rituals or practices. He was equally dismissive of both Hindu and Muslim religiosity. Naturally, he adhered to and advocated secularism in public life. As Prime Minister, however, he occasionally made concessions to Muslims in an effort to make the minority community feel secure in a Hindu-majority country. Thus, the allegation of minority appeasement against him and the Congress Party cannot be entirely dismissed.
Nehru’s economic thinking was somewhat left-oriented. During his student days in England, he was exposed to Fabian socialism. Following the Bolshevik Revolution, he was impressed by the Soviet Union’s rapid economic progress under socialism. Furthermore, his fierce anti-colonialism and his understanding of the atrocities committed by the East India Company made him suspicious of capitalism and foreign capital. This ideological orientation shaped his economic policies after independence. His land reforms, large dam projects for irrigation and electricity, the establishment of institutions of excellence in higher education, and the initiation of India’s nuclear and space programmes are widely acknowledged as the achievements of a visionary leader. However, his policies of self-reliance through the expansion of the public sector, though well-intentioned, proved “disastrous.” As Tharoor observes, they “bred corruption and inefficiency with little improvement in the lives of the masses.”
At a time when countries around the world were compelled to align with one bloc or the other during the Cold War, Nehru championed the policy of non-alignment for India and other like-minded developing nations. Non-alignment earned him a position of leadership in the emerging Third World. However, his support for China’s claim to a permanent seat at the United Nations and his trust that China would honour the Panchsheel Agreement proved misplaced. The Chinese invasion of 1962 left him deeply devastated during the final years of his life and prime ministership.
In his concluding assessment of Nehru’s tenure as Prime Minister, Tharoor identifies the four principal pillars of his sixteen-year rule. He writes:
“Of the four major pillars of his system, two—democratic institution-building and staunch secularism—were indispensable to the country’s survival as a pluralist land; a third, non-alignment, preserved its self-respect and enhanced its international standing without bringing any concrete benefits to the Indian people; the fourth, socialist economics, was disastrous, condemning the Indian people to poverty and stagnation and engendering inefficiency, red-tapism and corruption on a scale rarely rivalled elsewhere.”
Overall, Tharoor presents Nehru as a leader of remarkable intellect, vision, and integrity whose greatest strengths and gravest mistakes continue to shape India’s political, economic, and strategic landscape.
Madhurjya Bezbaruah is a retired Professor of Economics at Gauhati University. He can be reached at: [email protected]