Explain Lord Wellesley's Subordinate Alliance system. How did it work?

Explain Lord Wellesley's Subordinate Alliance system. How did it work?

 Introduction: Lord Wellesley was appointed as the Governor General of Bengal India in 1798 during a transition period of Company rule and took some particularly significant decisions. One of the most famous of them was the policy of subservient alliance in the expansion of the British Empire in India.

With his ability and intelligence, he tried to eliminate the anti-British forces and give a permanent basis to the English supremacy in this country by extreme imperialist diplomacy. He annexed the powerful kingdoms of India by a policy of subjugation and alliance with great achievement, skill and novel ingenious policy tactics.

Background: His earlier neutrality allowed the influence of the native monarchs and the French in the country to such an extent that it weakened British rule to a great extent. In such a situation the company government had to face some problems- viz

1. Tipu Sultan tried to get the help of French, Turkish and native powers to fight the British. On the other hand, in the battle of Khardar, not getting the promised force of the English, the English turned away and the Nizam raised an educated army with the help of the French.

3. Gradually the Maratha king Siddiraj became powerful.

8. 5. 6. . England was armed with the fantasy of conquering India by French hero Napoleon. Attempts to enlist European military aid between rival Indian rulers. Jamal Shah, ruler of Kabul, was preparing to invade India.

7. Especially at that time the company was in financial trouble. In this dire situation of the Company, a far-sighted ruler like Lord Wellesley took charge and adopted an ingenious and novel policy of subjugation alliance to eliminate the French influence from India and make the British power a sovereign power in India. Policy of submissive alliance: The strategic foreign policy adopted by Lord Wellesley instead of the neutral policy of earlier John Shore to build a strong British empire in India by eliminating the military power of the native princely classes is known in history as policy of submissive alliance. Wellesley named his policy of subjugation as the principle of subjugation of the native states by military subjugation of the English company instead of French military aid. Approaches to the policy of alliance: He considered the following three approaches as tools to implement his hegemony. For example- >. To eliminate the military power of the Indian states which were anti-British. 2. Forced the native kings to submit to the Company by subjugation treaties. The kings who were weak submitted to the company under one pretext or the other to absorb those kingdoms. Features of Mitra policy:

The features of this policy are as follows:

  Through this policy, the Company promised the Indian kings who signed the treaty of submission that the Company would protect them from all foreign and internal attacks. For this reason, arrangements were made to keep a group of English troops under the British commander in the kingdom of the allied king.

This Shorovik will be in the hands of an English commander. During the twelve years of this English army, the other native kings were bound to take part of their company, except by the permission of the Miss King's Company, who had signed the treaty.

1. Nizam of Hamad The Nizam of Hyderabad became the first victim of this policy in 1880. Fearing a Maratha attack and for the security of the state, the Nizam, bound by the treaty with the British, gave the Bhangabhadra and southern parts of his kingdom south of the Krishna river to the Company in lieu of cash to support the English army. His kingdom was thus freed from French influence and became a British dependency, and the British army continued to grow, which was of particular use to the Company during the Battle of Mysore.

2. Tipu Sultan of Mysore. Then Lord Welasani called upon Tipu Sultan of Mysore for this policy, but the mighty independent Tipu refused this offer, in the fourth battle with the combined forces of the British, Tipu Sultan was defeated and killed, and most of the kingdoms of Mysore came under the British Empire.

3. warrior Then the company made the Nawab of Ayodhya afraid of a possible attack from Kabul at home towards Ayodhya, the black hand of his imperialist policy, and forced him to accept this policy on the complaint of the Ayodhya miscreant, in return he forced the British to give up the Gorakhpur, Rohilla, Khand and Doab regions at the expense of the British army. Originally, the company controlled Ayodhya to protect its north-west frontier.

4. Maratha Policy: The Maratha king Yashovant Rao was driven out of Poona and became an Anonyopa with the British in 1802 by the Treaty of Obasscin. The Treaty of Besin, signed in 1802, was the crowning achievement of Wellesley's diplomatic skills, by which he virtually monopolized the Deccan and handed over his foreign relations and policy to the Company of Jasobanta Rao.

5. Sindhis and Bhogle Rebellion When all the Maratha chieftains like Sindhia, Bhosale and Holkar refused to accept the treaty, the Second Anglo-Maratha War broke out. In this battle, Scindia and Bhosl's forces were defeated by the British and the alliance was signed and the entire Doab region came under the control of the British.

6. Surat: Taking advantage of the succession dispute, after the death of the sonless Nawab of Surat, Lord Wellesley ignored his brother's claim and handed over the rulership to him in return for an annual stipend.Incorporated into the empire.

7. Application to other states was the third phase of his policy of state expansion by usurping neighboring and invited states on various pretexts. At this stage Tanjore, Karnataka and Honekar won the war and various states came under the English company. Lord Wellesley argued that with this principle of annexation he would free the people from the misrule of the native kings and therefore he said that the state was absorbed by the party and later adopted Dalhousie and his imperialist principles, so Lord Wellesley is called Stout annexationist. But his policy of expansion was not supported by the English, because it increased the company's plan, so in 1805, Walesa was sent to the country.

As a result of the policy of alliance 4 the effectiveness of the policy led to the surrender of the independence of the Indian kings and the reduction of their influence, prestige and dignity, historian Mill said, "The oppression of the people was limited during the period of the native rulers. But in the hands of the foreigners it reached the extreme." According to Thomas Monro, when this policy was implemented it resulted in the destruction of village prosperity and even the desolation of villages. The result of the subordination policy in the Indian subcontinent was as follows: while paying additional taxes to the company, the landlords imposed an additional tax burden on the subjects.

The native kings had to maintain the Company's army at their own expense. As a result, the morale of the Indian kings was broken and various misfortunes were achieved. The native kings by no means lost the legitimacy to oppose the Company in any way.

As a result of this treaty, the foreign armies blocked virtually all royal powers of the native kings. As a result, native kings became puppet kings of the company. Criticism: Many Indian monarchs lost their independence by falling victim to this bare imperialist and coercive alliance treaty, which was riddled with many flaws. For the Indian kings it was a hideous, humiliating imperial octopus. In some cases the indentured native kings put extra pressure on the subjects to pay the company. According to Thomas Monro, “Wherever this treaty was established there were to be seen decayed and depopulated villages. Above all, this policy had no democratic character, because the agreement was imposed on others without considering the advantages and disadvantages of some."

In view of the conclusion and the above discussion, it can be said that Lord Wellesley, as the representative of the Company, was able to overcome the Company's condition by applying the policy of dominant alliance in the Company's interest to the British interest despite hurting the Indian interest. In addition, he took over the government at a time of danger for the company in British India and expanded the British Empire with his own strength and talent and was able to place himself in the history of India as a successful imperialist. He was therefore admirable in the interests of the Company, though despised in the interests of the Indians.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post