British Indian Army

Definition and stakes

Portrait of Lala Lajpat Rai Lala Lajpat Rai,  Young India

“ Nor can the civil population be trusted to keep arms, much less to{37} manufacture them. Much fuss has been made over the Indians having been allowed to participate in the European War. The Indians have gone mad over the incident, as if that were the greatest boon that could be conferred on them. The truth is that the step was actuated by and taken purely in British interests. Without the Indian contingent Great Britain could not send a decent expeditionary force to France. The whole of the white army could not be removed from India. ”
Source: Gutenberg

Portrait of Lala Lajpat Rai Lala Lajpat Rai,  The Political Future of India

“ The armies of the various Asiatic Governments surrounding India have no European elements in them and the Indian soldier is as efficient a fighter as is needed as a protection. That the Indian army should be almost exclusively officered by the British is a survival of the policy of mistrust, jealousy and racial discrimination which has hitherto prevailed. It is time that the Indian army should in future be mainly officered by the Indians. Until that is achieved it must continue as a tentative measure to be officered by [Pg 59] the British, and the Indian Revenues must bear the burden. ”
Source: Gutenberg

Portrait of Lala Lajpat Rai Lala Lajpat Rai,  The Political Future of India

“ There is absolutely no need of British soldiers in India for the purposes of defence, but if the British Government wants to keep them as safeguards against mutiny among the purely Indian army or against the spirit of rebellion that at any time may exhibit itself among the Indian people, then the British exchequer must pay for them as it did in the case of British garrison in South Africa or as the United States does in the case of American troops in the Philippines. ”
Source: Gutenberg

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature