Friday, October 12, 2007

Power Centres of India

Mukesh Ambani

Ratan Tata

Lakshmi Mittal

Aditya Birla


Azim Hasham Premji


N R Narayana Murthy


Sunil Bharati Mittal


Anil Agarwal

Informal Powerful Centres

Sonia Gandhi

L K Advani


Prakash Karat

Narendra Modi

Atal Behari Vajpayee

Priyanka Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi

Robert Vadra


Formal Power Centres


President

Vice-President

Prime Minister

former PMs

Speaker

CJI

Leaders of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha

CMs

Ambassadors

His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

Shri Robert Vadra

Saturday, June 30, 2007

Declaration on SEZs and Displacement

Bhubaneshwar SEZ Convention: Draft Declaration on SEZs and Displacement

Draft Declaration For Discussion During The Convention

MASS MOVEMENTS ACROSS INDIA DECIDE TO JOIN HANDS TO INTENSIFY STRUGGLE AGAINST DISPLACEMENT, LAND GRABBING, SEZs AND PRO-IMPERIALIST ECONOMIC POLICIES
[Declaration Adopted At The National Convention Against Displacement & SEZs Held At Bhubaneswar During June 26-27, 2007]

1. Countrywide Upsurge of Mass Movements:
We realise that the mass movement that we represent or support is a part of a countrywide upsurge of mass movements against displacement and anti-people pro-imperialist industrialisation. This countrywide upsurge of mass movements includes the Kashipur Movement against the Bauxite mining and Alumina plant of Birlas that has been going on for the last 13 years which in the year 2000 had to sacrifice three tribals in the struggle, the Kalinganagar Movement against forcible displacement for steel plants by the TATAs and other corporates going on for the last 3 years which has taken the life of 19 tribals, the Anti-Posco Movement in Earasama against the proposed steel plant of South Korean MNC Posco going on for the last 2 years, the Singur Movement against the TATAs( small car project) and the Nandigram Movement against land acquisition by the Salim group of Indonesia( for Chemical Hub based SEZ) that has laid down 17 lives so far and has forced all sections of the population to rethink on the anti-people SEZ policy of the government. In Haripur (West Bengal) the locals have so far waged a valiant struggle against the proposed Nuclear Power plant. The countrywide upsurge of mass movements has taken powerful roots in the Raigad Movement in Maharastra where the people are waging a heroic struggle against the 35,000 Ha. SEZ proposed by the Reliance Industries (of Mukesh Ambani). People of Uttar Pradesh are waging a valiant struggle against the Reliance’s (of Anil Ambani) 2500-Acre power plant in Dadri. People are fighting in Manesar in Haryana against the Reliance’s (of Mukesh Ambani) multi-product 35,000 Ha. SEZ project. People in Punjab are fighting against the forcible acquisition of farmland for the Trident group in Barnala, for international airport near Ludhiana and for thermal power plant at Nabha. In Chhatisgarh, near Jagdalpur the people are fighting forcible land acquisition for the proposed Steel plant by the TATAs. In Lanjigarh the people are waging a struggle against Bauxite mining and Alumina plant of Vedanta (Anil Agrawal). The peasants of Sambalpur district and adjoining areas are struggling against the massive diversion of water from the Hirakud Dam for large number of industries being established in the area that is increasingly reducing the area under irrigation. The fisher folk of Chilika who waged a successful fight against the TATAs in the late 90s and have laid down 5 lives in the Sorana firing incident are continuing their fight against corporate and mafia interests in the Chilika Lake. In the Keonjhar district of Orissa, the people have begun their struggle against the proposed steel plant by the Mittals and Uttam Galva. The local population is resisting the proposed 10,000-Acre Vedanta University project on the sea beach near Puri in Orissa. Several mass movements against displacement and anti-people projects are beginning to take shape in South Orissa that includes movement against proposed Nuclear Power Plant at Patisonepur in Ganjam, SEZ by TATAs in Gopalpur, Dam project on the river Mahendra Tanaya, etc. While the tribals of Kalinganagar demonstrated the path for fighting against displacement by laying down the lives of their fellowmen and resisting all efforts to displace them, the people of Nandigram have taken the anti-displacement movement to a higher plane through their spirit of unity and fierce resistance displayed in their uprising, their willingness and preparedness to face the armed attacks of the State and CPI (M) cadres. New movements against displacement & SEZs are shaping up almost on a daily basis. Only a few days back in Asansol (West Bengal) people have begun their protest against forcible land acquisition for expansion of the IISCO steel plant. People across the country are now waging heroic struggles against forcible displacement, anti-people & pro-imperialist industrialisation and SEZs.

2. Tribute to the Martyrs:
We salute all the martyrs who have laid down their lives in the struggle against displacement & SEZs and anti-people policies of the government. In particular we salute the martyrs form Kashipur, Kalinganagar, Sorana, Gangavaram, Singur and Nandigram. We also express solidarity with those injured and maimed, raped and also those against whom false police cases have been foisted. The sacrifices of the martyrs and those who are suffering will always inspire us for continuing the struggle against displacement and SEZs. In a fitting memory to the martyrs of anti-displacement movements across the country we pledge to intensify the struggle against displacement and SEZs till the government withdraws the policies that result in forcible displacement of lakhs of people from lands and livelihoods and the demands as elaborated below are fulfilled.

3. No More Forcible Displacement From Land and Livelihood:
On going and proposed large-scale land acquisition for mega industrial projects, infrastructure projects and SEZs is transforming the whole of the rural scenario in the country from bad to worse. Many state governments are boasting of formulating the best Rehabilitation &Resettlement (R&R) policies and the central government is talking about passing an R&R Act. The land acquisition by the Government under the garb of ‘public interest’ and posing before the people with ‘best R&R policies’ is to fool the people and to work in the interest of MNCs (Posco, Salim, etc.) and their Indian agents (the TATAs, the Zindals, the Mittals, the Ambanis, the Birlas, the Anil Agrawals, etc.). Through this process of displacement lands and livelihoods are being alienated from the peasants and other sections of the population and such lands are handed over to the corporates. In the past, crores of peasants across India were forced to accept displacement in the name of development of the country, which is actually the development of the imperialist forces (MNCs) and their Indian agents. Displacement has converted the peasants and rural folk into destitutes most of whom have been forced to become casual workers in urban centres without any rights. Fear of displacement from their homes, from lands and livelihoods, from their community and the thought of living the rest of their lives, as destitutes has suddenly become a reality for vast masses of India. The very people who according to the government are supposed to be benefiting from so-called industrialisation in the form of R&R benefits, jobs, urban facilities, social infrastructure such as schools and hospitals, etc. are seen to be opposing the most. In reality today’s governments have no intention and capacity to properly rehabilitate the displaced. The land grabbing through displacement is not only restricted to the rural areas. In urban areas the slum dwellers are being forcibly evicted to make way for city beautification, establishment of huge shopping malls, real estate development, widening of roads, etc often without any compensation and alternate dwelling place for the slum dwellers. The slum dwellers in Bhubaneswar, Mumbai, Visakhapatnam, and Chennai and in many cities across India are putting up a valiant fight against such policies of the government. At a time when the poor are fighting hard for land and livelihood rights they would no more tolerate the policy of alienating their lands. The masses of India are no more prepared to sacrifice in the name of development, which is opposed to their interests. The anti-displacement movement of the people has made it clear that people of India are no more prepared to accept forcible displacement.

4. Prepared To Face New Challenges:
The massive outburst of the people of Nandigram against the shameless and grossly anti-people manner of land acquisition for establishment of a SEZ by Indonesia based MNC Salim Industries and the countrywide resistance against land acquisition for MNCs and Indian corporates the government has been forced to amend the rules under the SEZ Act 2005 whereby instead of the government the corporates shall directly purchase land from the peasants. Even after this pronouncement, everywhere police is intervening on behalf of corporates. After the anti-Posco agitators detained some Posco officials who entered the struggle area without heeding to the advice of the agitators the government has started panicking and is considering providing legal assistance to the corporates at the time of land acquisition. This has exposed the hypocritical position of the government of no more acquiring land for the corporates. The resistance movements against displacement are already confronting with these new tactics of the MNCs and Indian corporates. We are sure the people of India would be able to understand this new tactics soon and would develop their own tactics to face such new challenges and many more to come.

5. We Will Not Be Cowed Down By State Repression:
We believe that forcible displacement and state repression to silence resistance to such displacement is being done to serve the imperialist forces and their Indian agents. By resorting to state repression in the form of lodging hundreds of false police cases, by resorting to terrorising the local population and resorting to firing on the unarmed protesters all the state governments have demonstrated that they do not care about the democratic rights of the people to protest. By implicating the leaders and activists in scores of false police cases the Government has shown that it is afraid of the mass movements against its polices. The judiciary has demonstrated clearly that it is on the side of the Government in this struggle against forcible displacement. And such stand of the judiciary has been used by the Government to cow down the struggling people. In Orissa the government is talking of ‘peaceful industrialisation process’ without using any force as the new mantra for industrialisation of Orissa. We understand this is just a gimmick aimed to divert public attention from the peoples’ uproar against the repressive methods used by the state governments across the country. Through the proposed peaceful industrialisation process the government may be making a case for adopting all other repressive methods except direct police firing to acquire lands. The talk of peaceful industrialisation is a camouflage. The intention of the government is actually peace for the corporates and state of fear for the people. We condemn the government for all forms of state repression, which many a times has taken the form of state sponsored terrorism. We resolve to use whatever little democratic means still available to expose the government and not be cowed down by state repression of any kind.

6. Reject Anti-People Pro-Imperialist Industrialisation & SEZs:
The industrialization policy of the government is not aimed at supplementing the production capacity of those products, which are in demand by the masses. Nor it is creating any additional employment for the vast army of unemployed of the country as the mega industries that are being pushed by the government are based on automation having a very small employment potential. Rather such industries are responsible for large-scale displacement and massive loss of employment. The recent rush is for establishment of industries that would eat away the minerals of India in the next 20-30 years and export semi-finished & low-value added intermediate products for manufacturing of highly costly products by developed countries, which will be again imported by India at a huge cost. This anti-people and pro-imperialist industrialisation policy along with anti-people mining policy is encouraging establishment of huge mineral based industries, industrial infrastructure (roads, rail, power plants, water projects, etc) and SEZs that have resulted in peasants loosing their lands and livelihoods, massive unemployment, natural resources being exhausted in a rapid rate and nature getting devastated. The implementation of the SEZ policy is leading to creation of exclusive zones where no laws of land that protects the rights of the labour and that of the people at large shall be applicable which indicates near total lack of sovereignty of our country. No sovereign country can allow SEZs of the type the Indian Government has formulated. A path of industrialisation that converts the vast masses as destitutes and serves imperialist forces is no path of industrialisation for India. Industrial development has to be in the interest of the vast masses of India and to satisfy their needs i.e. catering to the home market of products of mass consumption. We therefore reject entirely the policy of industrialisation, and SEZs that is being thrust on the people of India.

7. Development of Agriculture Is Essential:
We believe that development of people of India is impossible without the development of agriculture as for more than 70% of the population of India agriculture and allied livelihoods such as fishing, animal husbandry, forestry are the only sustainable livelihoods. Today the Government is unable to provide any other sustainable livelihood after taking away agriculture and other allied livelihoods. Therefore the Government cannot be allowed to take away land and common property resources such as forests, streams, ponds, grazing lands, etc. from the people, which are the basis of sustainable agriculture and allied livelihoods. Continued domination of feudal forces over land holding and implementation of pro-imperialist agricultural policies in the name of green revolution has led to crippling of Indian agriculture. After the serious ill effects of the first ‘green revolution’ policies the government is talking of second ‘green revolution’ by formulating the ‘National Policy for Farmers’ or ‘Krishi Vikash Yojna’ that the Prime Minister is slated to announce from the ramparts of the red fort on 15th August 2007. Imposition of GM seeds, contract farming and corporate control of agricultural sector are the basic elements of such a policy which where implemented are already destroying the backbone of the peasantry. Such policies will fasten the process of complete corporatisation of agriculture of India as has been done in the USA, Canada, and most west-European countries whereby only 2-5 % of the population control the entire agriculture of the country. Farmers’ suicides are a serious indicator of the great crisis facing Indian agriculture. In spite of the grave crisis in the rural economy of India that is forcing some farmers in some locations to abandon their lands and migrate to urban centres in search of jobs, people across India are giving supreme sacrifices to save their agricultural lands and livelihoods, the common property resources the forests, sources of water, etc. We have to fight for protection and restoration of Indian agriculture. Apart from protecting agriculture-based livelihoods, the objective of not allowing cultivable land and forestland for Industry is to ensure food security for the entire population of India, which is already under tremendous strain. There is a necessity for instilling confidence amongst the peasants and rural folk that alternate economic development is possible. Different groups across India are trying to implement alternate development models on a small scale. Different political forces working amongst people have their own vision of alternate development. The peasants of India realise that even in the prevailing situation of agrarian crisis gripping the country there is no other option but to stick to agriculture and allied occupations. Industrial development of India has to be in the interest of the masses and it can only happen on the basis of development of agriculture and that of the rural economy. We demand development of agriculture and the rural economy in the interest of the vast masses of India.

8. Throw Out Pro-Imperialist Policies:
We understand that forcible displacement of the people from their lands and livelihoods for establishment of mega industries/projects and establishment of exclusive economic enclaves by the MNCs and Indian corporates in the name of SEZs are part of the pro-imperialist policies that the Indian state has adopted. The imperialist globalisation policies being pursued by the Indian Government and all the state governments is to protect the interest of the global capital and allow its free movement across the world. This Imperialist globalisation has left the poor of India and even the lower middle classes in a precarious situation where for even the basic necessities of life people are to depend upon the market, which again is controlled by the imperialist forces (MNCs, World Bank, IMF, WTO, etc.) and their Indian agents (TATAs, Ambanis, Birlas, Zindals, Agrawals, Mittals, etc.). We realise that the people of India are now slave to a system that is controlled by the imperialist forces and their Indian agents on the one hand and the feudal lords who continue with their repressive apparatus in the rural areas. We further realise that the fight against forcible displacement and SEZs has to be part of a bigger struggle against the pro-imperialist policies of the Indian state. Agrarian revolutionary movements across the country have been part of the various streams of struggles against the present policies. We will join hands with all those forces that are fighting against pro-imperialist policies and intensify the struggle to throw out the pro-imperialist policies.

9. To Rise To Potential:
Our mass movements have played an important role in exposing the government and the ruling political parties. That the government and the ruling political parties are serving the interests of the imperialist forces and their Indian agents is now known to a large number of people across the country due to our mass movements and the continuous work done by many political forces who work amongst the people. In this period of upsurge mass movements many NGOs and foreign funded organisations are seen to be organising mass movements against displacement and have been trying to enter existing movements. These are forces of compromise and mostly agents of imperialism. They play a divisive role in the movements and must be exposed and isolated. The aim of all mass movements against displacement & SEZs is to be able to force the government to bring a halt to all land acquisition and withdraw anti-people and pro-imperialist industrialisation and SEZ policies. We realise that our mass movements have not been able to rise to this potential. We also realise that with the coming together of mass movements and political forces against displacement, land grabbing, SEZs and anti-people industrialisation across the country a co-ordinated and intensified struggle can be launched that would proceed in the direction of forcing the government to bring a halt to all land acquisition and withdraw anti-people and pro-imperialist industrialisation and SEZ policies.

10. Call For United and Intensified Struggle & Our Demands:
We realise that there is an urgent need to move beyond expressing solidarity with different movements and carrying out propaganda against forcible displacement, land grabbing and SEZs. We resolve that all mass movements against displacement, land grabbing, anti-people industrialisation, SEZs, etc. that are present in this convention will join hands and make appropriate efforts to join hands with all those political forces who would are and/or willing to support our mass movements and would be willing to support the demands as listed below to launch a united action. The National Convention Against Displacement and SEZs gives a call to all mass movements against displacement, land grabbing and SEZs and the political forces in support of these movements to fight unitedly and to intensify the struggle against Displacement, Land Grabbing and SEZs and co-operate with other forces in different struggles by establishing a co-ordination mechanism to carry forward a united and intensified struggle. We resolve to carry forward an intensive and countrywide struggle against displacement and SEZs till the state governments and the central government fulfil the following specific demands:

(1) Bring a Halt to all land acquisition/grabbing by/for MNCs & Indian corporates for anti-people industrialisation, for SEZs and in the name of development. No cultivable land and land that sustains livelihoods of people are to be alienated for any other purpose from the people. Repeal the colonial and anti-peasant and anti-people Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

(2) Bring a halt to all forms of state repression against mass movements and the activists of mass movements and give exemplary punishment to the perpetrators of police and other forms of repression.

(3) Withdraw the anti-people and pro-imperialist industrialisation, land grabbing and SEZ policies immediately and withdraw the SEZ status given to industrial and business units on a retrospective basis. Repeal the SEZ Act 2005.

(4) Withdraw the anti-people and pro-imperialist agriculture policies that are being pushed in the name of ‘National Policy for Farmers’ or ‘Krishi Vikash Yojna’ or by any other name and bring halt to contract farming, corporate farming, grabbing of cultivable land and corporate control of the agriculture marketing system.

(5) A white paper on Displacement since 1947 be published in a time bound manner and all the people who have been displaced by various projects since 1947 should be properly rehabilitated and resettled as per the R&R policies being developed by the central government within a fixed time period with land for the displaced.

(6) Undertake emergency measures to distribute land titles against all land under the occupation of the tribals and other peasants, which is being termed as Government land and distribute all cultivable lands that has been recorded in the name of Government to the landless within a fixed time period.

(7) Formulate and implement a people centred sustainable agriculture policy within a fixed time period giving focus to food grain production and a stable and appropriate income for the peasants and all those dependent upon the land based economy, which can be ensured by suitable institutional mechanisms and shouldering of the responsibility of remunerative prices for all crops by the government.

(8) Formulate and implement a people centred industrial policy that would include bringing a halt to privatisation of Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs), strengthening the existing PSEs, promote a pro-people mining policy and establishment of industries, which shall be of use to the vast masses of India.

(9) Withdraw all police cases against the leaders, activists and supporters of the mass movements against displacement, land grabbing and SEZs in a time bound manner.

(10) The government must adequately compensate all the martyr families and the injured in the struggle against displacement and SEZs since 1947 in a time bound manner.

We the following persons representing the mass movements and organisations mentioned against our names and individuals endorse the declaration as above and have put our signatures:

Published by
aseem
June 27, 2007 in SEZ News

Saturday, June 23, 2007

250 years of Battle of Plassey

In Kolkotta on June 23, a play, "Plassey" marked the completion of 250 years of the Battle of Plassey.

The Battle of Plassey took place on June 23, 1757, at Palashi, India, on the banks of the Bhagirathi River, about 150 km north of Calcutta, near Murshidabad, then the capital of the Nawab of Bengal. The opponents were Siraj Ud Daulah, the last independent Nawab of Bengal, and the British East India Company. The battle was waged during the Seven Years' War in Europe (1756–1763); the French East India Company sent a small contingent to fight against the British East India Company.

Siraj-ud-Daulah's army commander defected to the British, causing his army to collapse. As a result, the entire province of Bengal fell to the Company. The enormous wealth gained from the Bengal treasury allowed the Company to significantly strengthen its military might. Today, Plassey is judged to be one of the pivotal battles leading to the formation of the British Empire in India.

Pôlash, an extravagant red flowering tree (Flame of the forest), gives its name to a small village near the battlefield. A phonetically accurate romanization of the Bengali name would be Battle of Palashi, but the spelling "Plassey" is now conventional.

Background

The ostensible reason for the Battle of Plassey was Siraj-ud-Daulah's capture of Fort William, Calcutta (which he renamed Alinagar) during June, 1756, but the battle is today seen as part of the geopolitical ambition of the East India Company and the larger dynamics of colonial conquest.

This conflict was precipitated by a number of disputes [2]:

* The illegal use of Mughal Imperial export trade permits (dastaks) granted to the British in 1717 for engaging in internal trade within India. The British cited this permit as their excuse for not paying taxes to the Bengal Nawab.
* British interference in the Nawab's court, and particularly their support for one of his aunts, Ghaseti Begum. The son of Ghaseti's treasurer had sought refuge in Fort William, and Siraj demanded his return.
* Additional fortifications with mounted guns had been placed on Fort William without the consent of the Nawab; and
* The British East India Company's policy of favouring Hindu Marwari merchants such as Jagat Sheth .

During this capture of Fort William, in June 1756, an event occurred that came to be known as the Black Hole of Calcutta. A narrative by one John Zephaniah Holwell, plus the testimony of another survivor, Cooke, to a select committee of the House of Commons, coupled with subsequent verification by Robert Orme, placed 146 British prisoners into a room measuring 18 by 15 feet, and only 23 survived the night. The story was amplified in colonial literature, but the facts are widely disputed[3]. In any event, the Black Hole incident, which is often cited as a reason for the Battle at Plassey, was not widely known until James Mill's History of India (1817), after which it became the grist of schoolboy texts on India.

As the forces for the battle were building up, the British settlement at Fort William sought assistance from Presidency of Fort St. George at Madras, which sent Colonel Robert Clive and Admiral Charles Watson. They re-captured Calcutta on January 2, 1757, but the Nawab marched again on Calcutta on February 5, 1757, and was surprised by a dawn attack by the British [4]. This resulted in the Treaty of Alinagar on February 7, 1757 [5].

Growing French influence

At the connivance of the enterprising French Governor-General Joseph François Dupleix, French influence at the court of the Nawab was growing. French trade in Bengal was also increasing in volume. The French also lent the Nawab some soldiers to operate heavy artillery pieces.

Ahmad Shah Abdali

Siraj-Ud-Daulah faced conflicts on two fronts simultaneously. In addition to the threat posed by the British East India Company, he was confronted on his western border by the advancing army of the Afghan, Ahmad Shah Abdali, who had captured and looted Delhi in 1756. So, Siraj sent the majority of his troops west to fight under the command of his close friend and ally, the Diwan of Patna, Ram Narain.

Court intrigue

In the midst of all of this, there were intrigues at Siraj Ud Daulah's court at Murshidabad. Siraj was not a particularly well-loved ruler. Young (he succeeded his grandfather in April, 1756 at the age of 23) and impetuous, he was prone to make enemies quickly. The most dangerous of these was his wealthy and influential aunt, Ghaseti Begum (Meherun-Nisa), who wanted another nephew, Shawkat Jang, installed as Nawab.

Mir Jafar, commander-in-chief of the army, was also uneasy with Siraj, and was courted assiduously by Ghaseti. Eventually, through the connivance of traders such as Amichand (who had suffered as a result of the siege of Calcutta), and William Watts, Mir Jafar was brought into the British fold.

Company policy

The Company had long since decided that a change of regime would be conducive to their interests in Bengal. In 1752, Robert Orme, in a letter to Clive, noted that the company would have to remove Siraj's grandfather, Alivardi Khan, in order to prosper [6].

After the premature death of Alivardi Khan in April, 1756, his nominated successor was Siraj-ud-Daulah, a grandson whom Alivardi had adopted. The circumstances of this transition gave rise to considerable controversy and the British began supporting the intrigues of Alivardi's eldest daughter, Ghaseti Begum against that of his grandson, Siraj.

Instructions dated October 13, 1756 from Fort St. George instructed Robert Clive, "to effect a junction with any powers in the province of Bengal that might be dissatisfied with the violence of the Nawab's government or that might have pretensions to the Nawabship". Accordingly, Clive deputised William Watts, chief of the Kasimbazar factory of the Company, who was proficient in Bengali and Persian, to negotiate with two potential contenders, one of Siraj's generals, Yar Latif Khan, and Siraj's grand-uncle and army chief, Mir Jafar Ali Khan.

On April 23, 1757 the Select Committee of the Board of Directors of the British East India Company approved Coup d'état as its policy in Bengal.

Mir Jafar, negotiating through an Armenian merchant Khwaja Petruse, was the Company's final choice. Finally, on June 5, 1757 a written agreement was signed between the Company, represented by Clive, and Mir Jafar. It ensured that Mir Jafar would be appointed Nawab of Bengal once Siraj Ud Daulah was deposed.

Troops

The British army was vastly outnumbered, consisting of 2,200 Europeans and 2,100 native Indians and a small number of guns. The Nawab had an army of about 50,000 with some heavy artillery operated by about 40 French soldiers sent by the French East India Company.

Principal officers - British

* Major Killpatrick
* Major Grant
* Then Major Eyre Coote, later Lieutenant-General, and then Sir Eyre Coote
* Captain Gaupp
* Captain Richard Knox, 1st CO of the 1st Bengal Native Infantry

Principal officers - Nawab

* Mir Jafar Ali Khan - commanding 16,000 cavalry
* Mir Madan
* Manik Chand
* Rai Durlabh
* Monsieur Sinfray - French artillery officer

British East India Company Regiments

* 39th (Dorsetshire) Regiment of Foot, 1st Battalion
* 1st Bombay European Fusiliers, also known as 103rd Regiment of Foot
* Royal Madras Fusiliers, also known as 102nd Regiment of Foot
* Royal Bengal Fusiliers, also known as 101st Regiment of Foot
* 1st. Bengal Native Infantry (BNI), also known as the Lal Paltan (Hindi for Red Platoon)
* 9th Battery, 12th Regiment, Royal Artillery [7]
* 50 naval ratings from HMS Tyger [8]

Battle details

The battle opened on a very hot and humid morning at 7:00 a.m. on June 23, 1757 where the Nawab's army came out of its fortified camp and launched a massive cannonade against the British camp. The 18th Century historian Ghulam Husain Salim describes what followed:
“ Mīr Muhammad Jafar Khān, with his detachment, stood at a distance towards the left from the main army; and although Sirāju-d-daulah summoned him to his side, Mīr Jafar did not move from his position. In the thick of the fighting, and in the heat of the work of carnage, whilst victory and triumph were visible on the side of the army of Sirāju-d-daulah, all of a sudden Mīr Madan, commander of the Artillery, fell on being hit with a cannon-ball. At the sight of this, the aspect of Sirāju-d-daulah’s army changed, and the artillerymen with the corpse of Mīr Madan moved into tents. It was now midday, when the people of the tents fled. As yet Nawāb Sirāju-d-daulah was busy fighting and slaughtering, when the camp-followers decamping from Dāūdpūr went the other side, and gradually the soldiers also took to their heels. Two hours before sun-set, flight occurred in Sirāju-d-daulah’s army, and Sirāju-d-daulah also being unable to stand his ground any longer fled. ”
[9]

At around 11:00 a.m., Mir Madan, one of the Nawab's most loyal officers, launched an attack against the fortified grove where the East Indian Company was located, and was mortally wounded by a British cannonball. This cannonade was essentially futile in any case; the British guns had greater range than those of the French.

At noon, a heavy rainstorm fell on the battlefield, wherein the tables were turned. The British covered their cannons and muskets for protection from the rain, whereas the French did not.

As a result, the cannonade ceased by 2:00 p.m. and the battle resumed where Clive's chief officer, Kilpatrick, launched an attack against the water ponds in between the armies. With their cannons and muskets completely useless, and with Mir Jafar's cavalry who were closest to the English refusing to attack Clive's camp, revealing his treachery, the Nawab was forced to order a retreat.

By 5:00 p.m., the Nawab's army was in full retreat and the British had command of the field.

The battle cost the British East India Company just 22 killed and 50 wounded (most of these were native sepoys), while the Nawab's army lost at least 500 men killed and wounded [10].

Aftermath

The Battle of Plassey is considered as a starting point to the events that established the era of British dominion and conquest in India.

Mir Jafar's fate

Mir Jafar, for his betrayal of the Nawab Siraj Ud Daulah and alliance with the British, was installed as the new Nawab, while Siraj Ud Daulah was captured on July 2 in Murshidabad as he attempted to escape further north. He was later executed on the order of Mir Jafar's son. Ghaseti Begum and other powerful women were transferred to a prison in distant Dhaka, where they eventually drowned in a boat accident, widely thought to have been ordered by Mir Jafar.

Mir Jafar as Nawab chafed under the British supervision, and so requested the Dutch East India Company to intervene. They sent seven ships and about 700 sailors up the Hoogley to their settlement, but the British led by Colonel Forde managed to defeat them at Chinsura on November 25, 1759. Thereafter Mir Jafar was deposed as Nawab (1760) and they appointed Mir Kasim Ali Khan, (Mir Jafar's son-in-law) as Nawab. Mir Kasim showed signs of independence and was defeated in the Battle of Buxar (1764), after which full political control shifted to the Company.

Mir Jafar was re-appointed and remained the titular Nawab until his death in 1765, while all actual power was exercised by the Company.

Rewards

As per their agreement, Clive collected £ 2.5 million for the company, and £ 234,000 for himself from the Nawab's treasury [11]. In addition, Watts collected £ 114,000 for his efforts. The annual rent of £ 30,000 payable by the Company for use of the land around Fort William was also transferred to Clive for life. To put this wealth in context, an average British nobleman could live a life of luxury on an annual income of £ 800 [12].

Robert Clive was appointed Governor of Bengal in 1765 for his efforts. William Watts was appointed Governor of Fort William on June 22, 1758. But he later resigned in favour of Robert Clive, who was also later appointed Baron of Plassey in 1762. Clive later committed suicide in 1774, after being addicted to opium.

Terms of agreement

These were the terms agreed between the new Nawab and the Company:

1. Confirmation of the mint, and all other grants and privileges in the Alinagar treaty with the late Nawab.
2. An alliance, offensive and defensive, against all enemies whatever.
3. The French factories and effects to be delivered up, and they never permitted to resettle in any of the three provinces.
4. 100 lacs of rupees to be paid to the Company, in consideration of their losses at Calcutta and the expenses of the campaign.
5. 50 lacs to be given to the British sufferers at the loss of Calcutta
6. 20 lacs to Gentoos, Moors, & black sufferers at the loss of Calcutta.
7. 7 lacs to the Armenian sufferers. These three last donations to be distributed at the pleasure of the Admiral and gentlemen of Council.
8. The entire property of all lands within the Mahratta ditch, which runs round Calcutta, to be vested in the Company: also, six hundred yards, all round, without, the said ditch.
9. The Company to have the zemindary of the country to the south of Calcutta, lying between the lake and river, and reaching as far as Culpee, they paying the customary rents paid by the former zemindars to the government.
10. Whenever the assistance of the British troops shall be wanted, their extraordinary charges to be paid by the Nawab.
11. No forts to be erected by the Nawab's government on the river side, from Hooghley downwards.

* One of members of Clive's entourage at Plassey was a young volunteer called Warren Hastings. He was appointed the British Resident at the Nawab's court in 1757. Warren later became the first Governor-General of India for the British East India Company between 1773 to 1786 when he was impeached for corruption.
* Clive was later awarded the title Baron of Plassey and bought lands in County Limerick and County Clare, Ireland naming part of his lands near Limerick City, Plassey. It retains this name to this day and is now the site of the University of Limerick.
* The French guns captured at this battle can still be visited at the Victoria Memorial in Calcutta.
* The infamous meeting between Mir Jafar and Watts took place at Jaffarganj, a village close to Murshidabad. Mir Jafar's palace now stands in ruins at the place, but close to it is a gate called Namakharamer Deori (literally traitor's gate) where Watts is supposed to have entered the palace disguised as a purdanasheen (Urdu for veiled) lady in a palanquin.
* One of the unseen protagonists of the court drama was a wealthy Sikh trader who went by the family name Jagat Sheth (Hindi: World Banker (actual name - Mahtab Chand)). He was a hereditary banker to the Mughal Emperor and the Nawab of Bengal and thus well conversant with court intrigues. He negotiated a 5% commission from Clive for his assistance with the court intrigue to defeat Siraj. However, when Clive refused to pay him after his success, he is supposed to have gone mad. The family (i.e. Jagat Sheths) remained bankers to the Company until the transfer of the British head quarters to Calcutta in 1773 [13].
* The Indian rebellion of 1857 began almost exactly a century later during May, 1857
* Plassey Day is still celebrated by 9(Plassey) Battery, Royal Artillery

Quotes

* "A great prince was dependent on my pleasure, an opulent city lay at my mercy; its richest bankers bid against each other for my smiles; I walked through vaults which were thrown open to me alone, piled on either hand with gold and jewels! Mr. Chairman, at this moment I stand astonished at my own moderation" - Baron Robert Clive commenting on accusations of looting the Bengal treasury after Plassey, at his impeachment trial in 1773 [14] [15]
* "Heaven-born general" - British Prime Minister William Pitt 'The Elder', Earl of Chatham referring to Robert Clive
* "It is possible to mention men who have owed great worldly prosperity to breaches of private faith; but we doubt whether it is possible to mention a state which has on the whole been a gainer by a breach of public faith." - Thomas Babington, Lord Macaulay, later British Secretary at War, who condemned Clive's actions

References

1. ^ a b c Paul K. Davis (1999). 100 Decisive Battles: From Ancient Times to the Present. Santa Barbara, California. ISBN 1-57607-075-1.
2. ^ Dirks, Nicholas. Scandal of the Empire - India and the creation of Imperial Britain London, Harvard University Press, 2006, ISBN 0-674-02166-5
3. ^ Dalley, JanThe Black Hole: Money, Myth and Empire,London, Fig Tree, June 2006, ISBN 0-670-91447-9
4. ^ Robert Clive reports to his father on his victory over Sirajuddaulah, 23 February 1757
5. ^ Bad Link
6. ^ Hill,S.C. The Indian Record Series, Bengal in 1756-7., 3 vols. London, 1895-1905, Vol. 2:307
7. ^ The British Army
8. ^ 9 (PLASSEY) BATTERY ROYAL ARTILLERY, THE BATTLE OF PLASSEY, 23 JUNE 1757
9. ^ Ghulam Husain Salim Riyazu-s-Salatin (Calcutta) 1902 Fasc. IV Available Here
10. ^ Robert Clive's letter to the Select Committee of the Board of Directors of the British East India Company reporting on the battle, 26 July 1757 - at the Project South Asia
11. ^ This requested article does not exist
12. ^ Prices & Money, The Salacious Historian's Lair
13. ^ Macaulay, Thomas Babbington Critical and Historical Essays, London, 1828, Part III
14. ^ Bad Link
15. ^ Dirks, Nicholas. Scandal of the Empire - India and the creation of Imperial Britain London, Harvard University Press, 2006, ISBN 0-674-02166-5

[edit] Further reading

* Chaudhury, S. The Prelude to Empire; Palashi Revolution of 1757,, New Delhi, 2000.
* Datta, K.K. Siraj-ud-daulah,, Calcutta, 1971.
* Gupta, B.K. Sirajuddaulah and the East India Company, 1756-1757, Leiden, 1962
* Harrington, Peter. Plassey 1757, Clive of India's Finest Hour, Osprey Campaign Series #35, Osprey Publishing, 1994.
* Hill, S.C. The Three Frenchmen in Bengal or The Commercial Ruin of the French Settlement in 1757, 1903
* Landes, David S. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. New York: Norton and Company, 1999.
* Marshall, P.J. Bengal - the British Bridgehead, Cambridge, 1987.
* Raj, Rajat K. Palashir Sharajantra O Shekaler Samaj, Calcutta, 1994.
* Sarkar, J.N. The History of Bengal, 2, Dhaka, 1968.
* Spear, Percival Master of Bengal. Clive and His India London, 1975
* Strang, Herbert. In Clive's Command, A Story of the Fight for India, 1904

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Plassey

250 years of Battle of Plassey

In Kolkotta on June 23, a play, "Plassey" marked the completion of 250 years of the Battle of Plassey.

The Battle of Plassey took place on June 23, 1757, at Palashi, India, on the banks of the Bhagirathi River, about 150 km north of Calcutta, near Murshidabad, then the capital of the Nawab of Bengal. The opponents were Siraj Ud Daulah, the last independent Nawab of Bengal, and the British East India Company. The battle was waged during the Seven Years' War in Europe (1756–1763); the French East India Company sent a small contingent to fight against the British East India Company.

Siraj-ud-Daulah's army commander defected to the British, causing his army to collapse. As a result, the entire province of Bengal fell to the Company. The enormous wealth gained from the Bengal treasury allowed the Company to significantly strengthen its military might. Today, Plassey is judged to be one of the pivotal battles leading to the formation of the British Empire in India.

Pôlash, an extravagant red flowering tree (Flame of the forest), gives its name to a small village near the battlefield. A phonetically accurate romanization of the Bengali name would be Battle of Palashi, but the spelling "Plassey" is now conventional.

Background

The ostensible reason for the Battle of Plassey was Siraj-ud-Daulah's capture of Fort William, Calcutta (which he renamed Alinagar) during June, 1756, but the battle is today seen as part of the geopolitical ambition of the East India Company and the larger dynamics of colonial conquest.

This conflict was precipitated by a number of disputes [2]:

* The illegal use of Mughal Imperial export trade permits (dastaks) granted to the British in 1717 for engaging in internal trade within India. The British cited this permit as their excuse for not paying taxes to the Bengal Nawab.
* British interference in the Nawab's court, and particularly their support for one of his aunts, Ghaseti Begum. The son of Ghaseti's treasurer had sought refuge in Fort William, and Siraj demanded his return.
* Additional fortifications with mounted guns had been placed on Fort William without the consent of the Nawab; and
* The British East India Company's policy of favouring Hindu Marwari merchants such as Jagat Sheth .

During this capture of Fort William, in June 1756, an event occurred that came to be known as the Black Hole of Calcutta. A narrative by one John Zephaniah Holwell, plus the testimony of another survivor, Cooke, to a select committee of the House of Commons, coupled with subsequent verification by Robert Orme, placed 146 British prisoners into a room measuring 18 by 15 feet, and only 23 survived the night. The story was amplified in colonial literature, but the facts are widely disputed[3]. In any event, the Black Hole incident, which is often cited as a reason for the Battle at Plassey, was not widely known until James Mill's History of India (1817), after which it became the grist of schoolboy texts on India.

As the forces for the battle were building up, the British settlement at Fort William sought assistance from Presidency of Fort St. George at Madras, which sent Colonel Robert Clive and Admiral Charles Watson. They re-captured Calcutta on January 2, 1757, but the Nawab marched again on Calcutta on February 5, 1757, and was surprised by a dawn attack by the British [4]. This resulted in the Treaty of Alinagar on February 7, 1757 [5].

Growing French influence

At the connivance of the enterprising French Governor-General Joseph François Dupleix, French influence at the court of the Nawab was growing. French trade in Bengal was also increasing in volume. The French also lent the Nawab some soldiers to operate heavy artillery pieces.

Ahmad Shah Abdali

Siraj-Ud-Daulah faced conflicts on two fronts simultaneously. In addition to the threat posed by the British East India Company, he was confronted on his western border by the advancing army of the Afghan, Ahmad Shah Abdali, who had captured and looted Delhi in 1756. So, Siraj sent the majority of his troops west to fight under the command of his close friend and ally, the Diwan of Patna, Ram Narain.

Court intrigue

In the midst of all of this, there were intrigues at Siraj Ud Daulah's court at Murshidabad. Siraj was not a particularly well-loved ruler. Young (he succeeded his grandfather in April, 1756 at the age of 23) and impetuous, he was prone to make enemies quickly. The most dangerous of these was his wealthy and influential aunt, Ghaseti Begum (Meherun-Nisa), who wanted another nephew, Shawkat Jang, installed as Nawab.

Mir Jafar, commander-in-chief of the army, was also uneasy with Siraj, and was courted assiduously by Ghaseti. Eventually, through the connivance of traders such as Amichand (who had suffered as a result of the siege of Calcutta), and William Watts, Mir Jafar was brought into the British fold.

Company policy

The Company had long since decided that a change of regime would be conducive to their interests in Bengal. In 1752, Robert Orme, in a letter to Clive, noted that the company would have to remove Siraj's grandfather, Alivardi Khan, in order to prosper [6].

After the premature death of Alivardi Khan in April, 1756, his nominated successor was Siraj-ud-Daulah, a grandson whom Alivardi had adopted. The circumstances of this transition gave rise to considerable controversy and the British began supporting the intrigues of Alivardi's eldest daughter, Ghaseti Begum against that of his grandson, Siraj.

Instructions dated October 13, 1756 from Fort St. George instructed Robert Clive, "to effect a junction with any powers in the province of Bengal that might be dissatisfied with the violence of the Nawab's government or that might have pretensions to the Nawabship". Accordingly, Clive deputised William Watts, chief of the Kasimbazar factory of the Company, who was proficient in Bengali and Persian, to negotiate with two potential contenders, one of Siraj's generals, Yar Latif Khan, and Siraj's grand-uncle and army chief, Mir Jafar Ali Khan.

On April 23, 1757 the Select Committee of the Board of Directors of the British East India Company approved Coup d'état as its policy in Bengal.

Mir Jafar, negotiating through an Armenian merchant Khwaja Petruse, was the Company's final choice. Finally, on June 5, 1757 a written agreement was signed between the Company, represented by Clive, and Mir Jafar. It ensured that Mir Jafar would be appointed Nawab of Bengal once Siraj Ud Daulah was deposed.

Troops

The British army was vastly outnumbered, consisting of 2,200 Europeans and 2,100 native Indians and a small number of guns. The Nawab had an army of about 50,000 with some heavy artillery operated by about 40 French soldiers sent by the French East India Company.

Principal officers - British

* Major Killpatrick
* Major Grant
* Then Major Eyre Coote, later Lieutenant-General, and then Sir Eyre Coote
* Captain Gaupp
* Captain Richard Knox, 1st CO of the 1st Bengal Native Infantry

Principal officers - Nawab

* Mir Jafar Ali Khan - commanding 16,000 cavalry
* Mir Madan
* Manik Chand
* Rai Durlabh
* Monsieur Sinfray - French artillery officer

British East India Company Regiments

* 39th (Dorsetshire) Regiment of Foot, 1st Battalion
* 1st Bombay European Fusiliers, also known as 103rd Regiment of Foot
* Royal Madras Fusiliers, also known as 102nd Regiment of Foot
* Royal Bengal Fusiliers, also known as 101st Regiment of Foot
* 1st. Bengal Native Infantry (BNI), also known as the Lal Paltan (Hindi for Red Platoon)
* 9th Battery, 12th Regiment, Royal Artillery [7]
* 50 naval ratings from HMS Tyger [8]

Battle details

The battle opened on a very hot and humid morning at 7:00 a.m. on June 23, 1757 where the Nawab's army came out of its fortified camp and launched a massive cannonade against the British camp. The 18th Century historian Ghulam Husain Salim describes what followed:
“ Mīr Muhammad Jafar Khān, with his detachment, stood at a distance towards the left from the main army; and although Sirāju-d-daulah summoned him to his side, Mīr Jafar did not move from his position. In the thick of the fighting, and in the heat of the work of carnage, whilst victory and triumph were visible on the side of the army of Sirāju-d-daulah, all of a sudden Mīr Madan, commander of the Artillery, fell on being hit with a cannon-ball. At the sight of this, the aspect of Sirāju-d-daulah’s army changed, and the artillerymen with the corpse of Mīr Madan moved into tents. It was now midday, when the people of the tents fled. As yet Nawāb Sirāju-d-daulah was busy fighting and slaughtering, when the camp-followers decamping from Dāūdpūr went the other side, and gradually the soldiers also took to their heels. Two hours before sun-set, flight occurred in Sirāju-d-daulah’s army, and Sirāju-d-daulah also being unable to stand his ground any longer fled. ”
[9]

At around 11:00 a.m., Mir Madan, one of the Nawab's most loyal officers, launched an attack against the fortified grove where the East Indian Company was located, and was mortally wounded by a British cannonball. This cannonade was essentially futile in any case; the British guns had greater range than those of the French.

At noon, a heavy rainstorm fell on the battlefield, wherein the tables were turned. The British covered their cannons and muskets for protection from the rain, whereas the French did not.

As a result, the cannonade ceased by 2:00 p.m. and the battle resumed where Clive's chief officer, Kilpatrick, launched an attack against the water ponds in between the armies. With their cannons and muskets completely useless, and with Mir Jafar's cavalry who were closest to the English refusing to attack Clive's camp, revealing his treachery, the Nawab was forced to order a retreat.

By 5:00 p.m., the Nawab's army was in full retreat and the British had command of the field.

The battle cost the British East India Company just 22 killed and 50 wounded (most of these were native sepoys), while the Nawab's army lost at least 500 men killed and wounded [10].

Aftermath

The Battle of Plassey is considered as a starting point to the events that established the era of British dominion and conquest in India.

Mir Jafar's fate

Mir Jafar, for his betrayal of the Nawab Siraj Ud Daulah and alliance with the British, was installed as the new Nawab, while Siraj Ud Daulah was captured on July 2 in Murshidabad as he attempted to escape further north. He was later executed on the order of Mir Jafar's son. Ghaseti Begum and other powerful women were transferred to a prison in distant Dhaka, where they eventually drowned in a boat accident, widely thought to have been ordered by Mir Jafar.

Mir Jafar as Nawab chafed under the British supervision, and so requested the Dutch East India Company to intervene. They sent seven ships and about 700 sailors up the Hoogley to their settlement, but the British led by Colonel Forde managed to defeat them at Chinsura on November 25, 1759. Thereafter Mir Jafar was deposed as Nawab (1760) and they appointed Mir Kasim Ali Khan, (Mir Jafar's son-in-law) as Nawab. Mir Kasim showed signs of independence and was defeated in the Battle of Buxar (1764), after which full political control shifted to the Company.

Mir Jafar was re-appointed and remained the titular Nawab until his death in 1765, while all actual power was exercised by the Company.

Rewards

As per their agreement, Clive collected £ 2.5 million for the company, and £ 234,000 for himself from the Nawab's treasury [11]. In addition, Watts collected £ 114,000 for his efforts. The annual rent of £ 30,000 payable by the Company for use of the land around Fort William was also transferred to Clive for life. To put this wealth in context, an average British nobleman could live a life of luxury on an annual income of £ 800 [12].

Robert Clive was appointed Governor of Bengal in 1765 for his efforts. William Watts was appointed Governor of Fort William on June 22, 1758. But he later resigned in favour of Robert Clive, who was also later appointed Baron of Plassey in 1762. Clive later committed suicide in 1774, after being addicted to opium.

Terms of agreement

These were the terms agreed between the new Nawab and the Company:

1. Confirmation of the mint, and all other grants and privileges in the Alinagar treaty with the late Nawab.
2. An alliance, offensive and defensive, against all enemies whatever.
3. The French factories and effects to be delivered up, and they never permitted to resettle in any of the three provinces.
4. 100 lacs of rupees to be paid to the Company, in consideration of their losses at Calcutta and the expenses of the campaign.
5. 50 lacs to be given to the British sufferers at the loss of Calcutta
6. 20 lacs to Gentoos, Moors, & black sufferers at the loss of Calcutta.
7. 7 lacs to the Armenian sufferers. These three last donations to be distributed at the pleasure of the Admiral and gentlemen of Council.
8. The entire property of all lands within the Mahratta ditch, which runs round Calcutta, to be vested in the Company: also, six hundred yards, all round, without, the said ditch.
9. The Company to have the zemindary of the country to the south of Calcutta, lying between the lake and river, and reaching as far as Culpee, they paying the customary rents paid by the former zemindars to the government.
10. Whenever the assistance of the British troops shall be wanted, their extraordinary charges to be paid by the Nawab.
11. No forts to be erected by the Nawab's government on the river side, from Hooghley downwards.

* One of members of Clive's entourage at Plassey was a young volunteer called Warren Hastings. He was appointed the British Resident at the Nawab's court in 1757. Warren later became the first Governor-General of India for the British East India Company between 1773 to 1786 when he was impeached for corruption.
* Clive was later awarded the title Baron of Plassey and bought lands in County Limerick and County Clare, Ireland naming part of his lands near Limerick City, Plassey. It retains this name to this day and is now the site of the University of Limerick.
* The French guns captured at this battle can still be visited at the Victoria Memorial in Calcutta.
* The infamous meeting between Mir Jafar and Watts took place at Jaffarganj, a village close to Murshidabad. Mir Jafar's palace now stands in ruins at the place, but close to it is a gate called Namakharamer Deori (literally traitor's gate) where Watts is supposed to have entered the palace disguised as a purdanasheen (Urdu for veiled) lady in a palanquin.
* One of the unseen protagonists of the court drama was a wealthy Sikh trader who went by the family name Jagat Sheth (Hindi: World Banker (actual name - Mahtab Chand)). He was a hereditary banker to the Mughal Emperor and the Nawab of Bengal and thus well conversant with court intrigues. He negotiated a 5% commission from Clive for his assistance with the court intrigue to defeat Siraj. However, when Clive refused to pay him after his success, he is supposed to have gone mad. The family (i.e. Jagat Sheths) remained bankers to the Company until the transfer of the British head quarters to Calcutta in 1773 [13].
* The Indian rebellion of 1857 began almost exactly a century later during May, 1857
* Plassey Day is still celebrated by 9(Plassey) Battery, Royal Artillery

Quotes

* "A great prince was dependent on my pleasure, an opulent city lay at my mercy; its richest bankers bid against each other for my smiles; I walked through vaults which were thrown open to me alone, piled on either hand with gold and jewels! Mr. Chairman, at this moment I stand astonished at my own moderation" - Baron Robert Clive commenting on accusations of looting the Bengal treasury after Plassey, at his impeachment trial in 1773 [14] [15]
* "Heaven-born general" - British Prime Minister William Pitt 'The Elder', Earl of Chatham referring to Robert Clive
* "It is possible to mention men who have owed great worldly prosperity to breaches of private faith; but we doubt whether it is possible to mention a state which has on the whole been a gainer by a breach of public faith." - Thomas Babington, Lord Macaulay, later British Secretary at War, who condemned Clive's actions

References

1. ^ a b c Paul K. Davis (1999). 100 Decisive Battles: From Ancient Times to the Present. Santa Barbara, California. ISBN 1-57607-075-1.
2. ^ Dirks, Nicholas. Scandal of the Empire - India and the creation of Imperial Britain London, Harvard University Press, 2006, ISBN 0-674-02166-5
3. ^ Dalley, JanThe Black Hole: Money, Myth and Empire,London, Fig Tree, June 2006, ISBN 0-670-91447-9
4. ^ Robert Clive reports to his father on his victory over Sirajuddaulah, 23 February 1757
5. ^ Bad Link
6. ^ Hill,S.C. The Indian Record Series, Bengal in 1756-7., 3 vols. London, 1895-1905, Vol. 2:307
7. ^ The British Army
8. ^ 9 (PLASSEY) BATTERY ROYAL ARTILLERY, THE BATTLE OF PLASSEY, 23 JUNE 1757
9. ^ Ghulam Husain Salim Riyazu-s-Salatin (Calcutta) 1902 Fasc. IV Available Here
10. ^ Robert Clive's letter to the Select Committee of the Board of Directors of the British East India Company reporting on the battle, 26 July 1757 - at the Project South Asia
11. ^ This requested article does not exist
12. ^ Prices & Money, The Salacious Historian's Lair
13. ^ Macaulay, Thomas Babbington Critical and Historical Essays, London, 1828, Part III
14. ^ Bad Link
15. ^ Dirks, Nicholas. Scandal of the Empire - India and the creation of Imperial Britain London, Harvard University Press, 2006, ISBN 0-674-02166-5

[edit] Further reading

* Chaudhury, S. The Prelude to Empire; Palashi Revolution of 1757,, New Delhi, 2000.
* Datta, K.K. Siraj-ud-daulah,, Calcutta, 1971.
* Gupta, B.K. Sirajuddaulah and the East India Company, 1756-1757, Leiden, 1962
* Harrington, Peter. Plassey 1757, Clive of India's Finest Hour, Osprey Campaign Series #35, Osprey Publishing, 1994.
* Hill, S.C. The Three Frenchmen in Bengal or The Commercial Ruin of the French Settlement in 1757, 1903
* Landes, David S. The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. New York: Norton and Company, 1999.
* Marshall, P.J. Bengal - the British Bridgehead, Cambridge, 1987.
* Raj, Rajat K. Palashir Sharajantra O Shekaler Samaj, Calcutta, 1994.
* Sarkar, J.N. The History of Bengal, 2, Dhaka, 1968.
* Spear, Percival Master of Bengal. Clive and His India London, 1975
* Strang, Herbert. In Clive's Command, A Story of the Fight for India, 1904

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Plassey

Friday, June 22, 2007

Special Explotation Zone

Special Explotation Zone has the following features:

** 10 year tax holidays - 100 % Income Tax Holidays for the first five years, 50% for the next five years
** Exemptions from duties, taxes and local levies including levies on construction material and stamp duty on land, zero customs duty on inputs, self-certification
** Public Utility Service" status
** Single window clearances
** In-house customs clearances
** Exempted from paying service tax