Asian Nationalism—The Second Stage

Abstract

IMPRESSIONS gained on a rapid tour of Asia are inevitably superficial; but it is a way of obtaining a conspectus, of seeing the region in breadth if not in depth. Ten years had elapsed since my last tour-which is an additional handicap. But the gap between visits has perhaps one advantage: by highlighting the changes that have taken place in the interval it may illumine the trend of developments. One of the most striking features of contemporary Asia, to my mind, is the transition that has occurred, in the past decade, from the first to the second stageof nationalism. It is a commonplace that, since the Second World War, the main driving force acting upon the countries of Southern Asia has been the explosive power of nationalism. Under its impact the Western empires have crumbled, and a whole batch of new states has arisen. These newcomers not only owe their creation to the nationalist movement, but also have received from it their initial impetus and direction. This is not to minimise the contribution of Communism. Obviously it has made its mark; but it has not been the main motive force, only an auxiliary motor. It has been successful only in alliance with nationalism, not in opposition to it. Even in the case of China, as the Russians would be the first to recognise, the triumph of Mao was a nationalist rather than a Communist victory. In the first stage, nationalism was simple and straightforward. There was one overriding aim-independence-to which everybody could subscribe. The enemy, too, was obvious and alien. Consequently, everybody knew what they were for and whom they were against. Slogans were easy to coin, and could serve instead of a policy because they did in fact express the essence of such common policy as there was. The rallying cry of Merdeka found a response in all the islands of Indonesia. On my first arrival in Asia I recall being confronted with the exhortation painted in large letters on the quayside: 'Quit India'-not a very cordial wel come, but it was short and to the point, and something on which nationalists of every hue (and eventually the British) could agree. Political activity is no less habit-forming than any other, and political attitudes held over any considerable length of time tend to produce a certain rigidity of posture. In the British dependencies, political agitation had a style all of its own. So successful was the propagation of the sporting instinct and notions of fair play that the contest between the