As India commemorates 70 years since partition, can the UK forge a new Much about the future of relations between the UK and India is. The British Council inaugurated the Year of Culture in India on 6 April projecting elements of the. British rule of India; Background; this case study considers the nature of British rule in India; The Indian Mutiny/Rebellion, ; British rule - the Raj; Links The rule of the British in India is possibly the most controversial and the most.
Independence: Do Indians care about the British any more?
Here's an alternative lens to review the history that the two nations share. East India Company, which grew from a small trading body into the world's first MNC, had a reputation for doing everything it could to maximise profits at the tragic expense of its subjects. Wikipedia As India celebrates 70 years of independence from the British, there is an alternative lens to view the history of the two nations. A history not solely defined by the Raj, but one that evolved during a period in the mid-eighteenth century before British rule became entrenched.
It was a time of acceptance and rejection, when class, rather than skin colour was often the over-riding factor of difference. As David Washbrook puts it, "Long exposure to European ideas gave rise to many other forms of cross-cultural dialogue — which could be positively evaluated by Europeans themselves, even in the metropolis. Most remarkable here was the great Maratha court at Thanjavur.
However, Jaitley stated that a formal dialogue on the agreement would only begin post-Brexit. Whilst many large UK companies have a presence in India, small and medium-sized British companies do not.
Independence: Do Indians care about the British any more? - BBC News
India hopes that the Access to India programme will not only encourage British SMES to export to India but also inspire them to manufacture in India fulfilling the aims of the Make in India initiative. From tothe number of Indian students studying in the UK doubled from 10, to over 20, In this summit, Cameron stated that "Education is an area where India and the UK could pool some of the advantages for mutual benefit.
Inthe then Home Secretary Theresa May announced a stricter immigration law. This included tighter rules for international students. Students were forced to return to their homeland after earning their degree. Acton stated that this action is "butchering" the Anglo-Indian friendship because it is "treating university students as immigrants. Business leaders such as Sir James Dyson have commented that forcing international students to move back to their homeland can be detrimental to the British economy in the long term.
Starting fromIndian students are able to stay in the UK for six months after their graduation. We want the brightest and best Indian students to attend our great universities; there is no limit to the number of genuine Indian students who can study in Britain," he said in the interview. After becoming the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Cameron was actively involved in enhancing the Indian-British relationship on various dimensions, such as "business, energy security, climate change, education, research, security and defense, and international relations.
Upon unveiling the statue on March 14,Cameron stated that "Our ties with India have remained close throughout history and continue to go from strength to strength — through mutual respect as equals, through cooperation, trade, and of course through the one-and-a-half million Indian diasporas living in Britain today who bring our two nations closer, to the benefit of both.
It was brutal and vicious. The rebels committed many atrocities. They were, however, disunited and badly organised. Gradually British troops, along with the forces of Indian rulers who sided with the British, overcame them.
There is a lot of evidence that the great majority of ordinary Indian peasants tried as hard as they could to stay out of the rebellion. They thought probably rightly that their lives would change little if they were ruled by the British or by the Indian leaders who were trying to get rid of the British.
Eventually the British forces defeated the rebels. Their revenge was just as vicious as the rebels had been, and the British and their allies committed many atrocities. After the rebellion the British government took direct control of India away from the East India Company. You can find out more about the rebellion by looking at case study 4 in this gallery. British rule - the Raj British rule from the time after the mutiny is often called the Raj. During this period a tiny number of British officials and troops about 20, in all ruled over million Indians.
This was often seen as evidence that most Indians accepted and even approved of British rule. There is no doubt that Britain could not have controlled India without the co-operation of Indian princes and local leaders, as well as huge numbers of Indian troops, police officers, civil servants etc. Other historians point out that British rule of India was maintained by the fact that Indian society was so divided that it could not unite against the British.
In fact, the British encouraged these divisions. The better-off classes were educated in English schools. They served in the British army or in the civil service.
They effectively joined the British to rule their poorer fellow Indians. There are huge arguments about whether the British created or enlarged these divisions in Indian society British society was deeply divided by classor whether the British simply took advantage of divisions that were already present in Indian society.
For much of the s the average Indian peasant had no more say in the way he or she was ruled than did the average worker in the United Kingdom. The British view tended to portray British rule as a charitable exercise - they suffered India's environment eg climate, diseases in order to bring to India good government and economic development eg railways, irrigation, medicine.
Modern admirers of British rule also note these benefits.