The Khilafat movement stands as one of the most significant political mobilizations in early 20th-century India. What began as a religious concern about the fate of the Ottoman Caliph became a powerful force that united Indian Muslims across class and sectarian lines-and eventually forged an unprecedented alliance with the Indian National Congress. Understanding how this movement emerged helps us grasp a pivotal moment when religious symbolism and nationalist politics intersected in remarkable ways.
Table of Contents
Roots in pan-Islamic sentiment
Long before the formal launch of the Khilafat movement in 1919, Indian Muslims had developed deep emotional ties to the Ottoman Caliphate. The Ottoman Sultan held a dual role-he was not only the political head of the Ottoman Empire but also the Caliph, recognized by many Sunni Muslims worldwide as the spiritual successor to Prophet Muhammad and the custodian of Islam’s holiest sites in Mecca and Medina.
This connection intensified during periods of crisis for the Ottoman Empire. The Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78 marked a turning point in Indian Muslim attitudes toward the Ottomans. The war sparked widespread concern among Indian Muslims who feared that Christian European powers were conspiring to dismantle the last great Muslim empire. During this period, even the newly established Muhammadan Anglo-Oriental College at Aligarh adopted Turkish dress with the distinctive red Fez cap as its uniform -a symbolic gesture of solidarity with the Ottoman cause.
The fears of Indian Muslims were not unfounded. The Ottoman Empire faced Italian attacks in 1911 and the Balkan Wars of 1912-13, which threatened its territorial integrity before World War I even began. Indian Muslims responded by organizing relief efforts. In 1911, the jurist Syed Ameer Ali founded the British Red Crescent Society to aid Ottoman subjects, and in 1912, Indian Muslims dispatched a medical mission to work with Turkish troops and refugees from the Balkan War. These humanitarian efforts reflected a growing sense of pan-Islamic solidarity that would later fuel the Khilafat movement.
Post-World War I catalyst
The immediate trigger for the Khilafat movement came from Turkey’s defeat in World War I. The Ottoman Empire had allied with Germany and the Central Powers, placing it on the losing side of the conflict. Indian Muslims sought to influence the post-war treaty-making process in a way that would restore the 1914 boundaries of the Ottoman Empire, despite Turkey having been defeated.
The Treaty of Sèvres in August 1920 intensified Muslim anxieties by dismembering the Ottoman Empire-detaching non-Turkish regions and giving parts of the Turkish homeland to Greece and other non-Muslim powers. This treaty was seen as a betrayal of British wartime promises. The British viceroy had promised at the war’s commencement that the religious sentiments of India’s Muslims would be respected and their holy places protected, while Prime Minister Lloyd George had pledged in 1918 that the caliph would not be deprived of territories predominantly Turkish in population.
Indian Muslims felt these promises were broken. In March 1919, the Khilafat Committee was formed in Bombay to defend the Khalifa’s temporal powers. The movement crystallized around three primary demands: the Khalifa must retain control over Muslim holy places, pre-war territories should be restored to preserve his influence, and the regions of Arabia, Syria, Iraq, and Palestine must remain under Muslim sovereignty.
Failed diplomatic efforts
Indian supporters of the Khilafat cause sent a delegation to London in 1920 to plead their case, but the British government dismissed them as idealistic pan-Islamists and refused to change its policy toward Turkey. The failure of these diplomatic efforts convinced the movement’s leaders that a different approach was necessary-one that would combine religious mobilization with nationalist politics.
Dual leadership streams
One of the distinctive features of the Khilafat movement was its unique leadership structure, which brought together two different groups of Indian Muslims who had previously operated in separate spheres.
The Western-educated intelligentsia
The first stream consisted of Western-educated Muslims, many from the Aligarh tradition. The Ali brothers-Muhammad Ali (1878-1931) and Shaukat Ali (1873-1938)-were newspaper editors from Delhi who became the public faces of the movement. Muhammad Ali, an Oxford-educated journalist, had already spent four years in prison during World War I for advocating resistance to British rule and supporting the Caliphate.
These publicist-politicians used modern methods of communication-newspapers, public speeches, and organized conferences-to spread the Khilafat message. They viewed European attacks upon the authority of the Caliph as an attack upon Islam itself and a threat to the religious freedom of Muslims under British rule.
The traditionalist ulema
The second leadership stream came from the ulema-the traditional Muslim religious scholars. This group included Maulana Abdul Bari of Firangi Mahal in Lucknow, the Islamic scholar Abul Kalam Azad, and Maulana Mahmud ul-Hasan, head of the madrasa at Deoband. These religious leaders provided the movement with theological legitimacy and access to traditional networks of influence-mosques, madrasas, and Sufi shrines.
The Khilafat movement forged the first significant political alliance between Western-educated Indian Muslims and the ulema over the religious symbol of the caliphate. Despite their different backgrounds and methods, both groups shared an anti-British stance and commitment to the pan-Islamic cause. The ulema’s involvement gave the movement a radical edge and helped mobilize ordinary Muslims who might not have responded to purely political appeals.
Formation of key organizations
To channel the growing energy around the Khilafat cause, two major organizations emerged in 1919 that would shape the movement’s trajectory.
The All-India Khilafat Committee
The Khilafat Committee of Bombay was designated as a central body with branches to be formed across the country. At a meeting on 11 November 1919, it changed its title to the Central Khilafat Committee of India. Under the leadership of the Ali brothers, Abul Kalam Azad, and Hasrat Mohani, the All-India Khilafat Conference held in November 1919 in Delhi decided to withdraw all cooperation from the government if their demands were not met.
The Central Khilafat Committee’s constitution outlined several objectives: to secure a just peace for Turkey, to settle the Khilafat question in accordance with Islamic requirements, and to ensure the fulfillment of British wartime pledges regarding the preservation of the Ottoman Empire’s integrity. The committee met in Amritsar in December 1919 and Bombay in February 1920, building organizational capacity for the coming mass mobilization.
The Jamiat al-Ulama-e-Hind
The second major organization was the Jamiat al-Ulama-e-Hind (Association of Indian Muslim Scholars). On 23 November 1919, during the Khilafat Committee’s first conference in Delhi, a group of twenty-five Muslim scholars held a separate meeting and founded this new organization. The revolutionary ulema resolved to carry on a non-violent freedom struggle in cooperation with their fellow countrymen.
The Jamiat’s first meeting in November 1919 demanded that Muslims abide by Islamic tenets, strengthen their relationship with the Islamic world, and foster Muslim-Hindu amity. Mufti Kifayatullah was elected as the first president, and the organization marked a decisive turning point-the ulema gave up armed struggle and chose non-violent resistance, eventually leading to Indian independence.
The eclipse of the Muslim League
These two new organizations-the All-India Khilafat Committee and the Jamiat al-Ulama-e-Hind-represented a new era of institutionalization in Muslim politics. They effectively overshadowed the Muslim League, which had been the primary political voice for Indian Muslims since 1906. The Khilafat organizations proved more effective at mass mobilization because they combined political organization with religious appeal, reaching Muslims who had never before participated in organized politics.
The stage was now set for the Khilafat movement to merge with Mahatma Gandhi’s Non-Cooperation movement, creating what would become the first all-India agitation against British rule. This combined movement saw an unprecedented degree of Hindu-Muslim cooperation and established Gandhi’s technique of non-violent protest at the center of the Indian nationalist movement. Though the Khilafat movement would ultimately fail in its immediate objective-Turkish nationalists abolished the caliphate in 1924-its legacy in shaping Indian political mobilization remained profound.
What do you think? Could the Khilafat movement have succeeded if the Turkish nationalists had not abolished the caliphate themselves? And what lessons does this unique alliance between religious leaders and Western-educated politicians offer for understanding political mobilization in diverse societies today?
Leave a Reply