Ted Grant Neither India or Pakistan For a Socialist Federation
Core Argument¶
Ted Grant's central thesis is that the 1965 Indo-Pakistani war over Kashmir was a reactionary conflict on both sides, serving the interests of the rival bourgeoisies in India and Pakistan while inflicting devastation on the working class and peasantry of the subcontinent. Grant argues that neither the Indian Congress government nor the Pakistani military dictatorship offered a progressive solution to the national question. The only genuine way forward, he contends, is a socialist federation of the entire subcontinent — a unified workers' and peasants' republic that would transcend the artificial borders imposed by British imperialism at partition. The article rejects the notion that workers should support "their own" bourgeoisie in a national war, insisting instead on revolutionary defeatism and the building of a united class struggle across both states.
Theoretical Grounding¶
The analysis is rooted in the classical Marxist approach to the national question, particularly Lenin's and Trotsky's writings on self-determination and the critique of bourgeois nationalism. Grant draws on the Marxist understanding that the bourgeoisie, once in power in colonial and semi-colonial countries, becomes a conservative force, incapable of resolving the democratic tasks of national unification and economic development. The article applies the theory of permanent revolution to the subcontinent: the Indian and Pakistani bourgeoisies, far from being progressive national liberators, have accommodated themselves to imperialism and are now rivals competing for markets, resources, and imperial patronage. Grant also deploys the Marxist method of "neither-nor" — neither supporting one imperialist camp nor the other, neither backing India nor Pakistan — which echoes the Bolshevik position during the First World War. The argument sits firmly within the Trotskyist tradition's insistence that only a workers' state can solve the national and democratic questions in the colonial and semi-colonial world.
Conjunctural Relevance¶
The article was written in the immediate aftermath of the 1965 war, triggered by Pakistani dictator Ayub Khan's Operation Gibraltar, an attempt to foment insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir. Grant notes that the war ended with a military stalemate but a political victory for the Indian bourgeoisie, which used the conflict to consolidate national unity behind Congress rule. He points to the economic costs — the diversion of resources from development to arms, the inflation and hardship imposed on workers and peasants — and the political costs, including the suppression of democratic rights and the strengthening of militarism on both sides. The article situates the conflict within the broader Cold War dynamic: India receiving aid from both the USSR and the US, Pakistan aligning with the US and China. Grant argues that the rival bourgeoisies are incapable of resolving the Kashmir dispute because both are tied to imperialist blocs and both rely on national chauvinism to maintain their rule. The conjuncture remains relevant today: the Kashmir conflict continues to fester, nuclear-armed states face off, and the working class of the subcontinent remains divided by borders that serve elite interests.
Where the Argument Continues¶
This article is part of a broader body of work by Ted Grant and the tradition he represented on the national question in South Asia. It connects to other articles in the Ted Grant Archive on the subcontinent, including analyses of the Bangladesh Liberation War and the role of the Pakistani military. The argument is developed further in the Marxist tradition's ongoing writing on Kashmir, particularly in In Defence of Marxism articles that trace the post-1965 trajectory of the conflict, the rise of the Kashmiri independence movement, and the failure of both Indian and Pakistani ruling classes to offer a democratic solution. The theoretical framework is deepened in broader Marxist texts on the national question, such as Lenin's The Right of Nations to Self-Determination and Trotsky's The Permanent Revolution, as well as in the RCI's contemporary analyses of nationalism and war. The argument also continues in Against the Current and Against the Stream discussions of the subcontinent's geopolitics.
Connections¶
- Lenin, The Right of Nations to Self-Determination — the foundational text on the Marxist approach to national liberation, which Grant applies critically to the post-colonial context.
- Trotsky, The Permanent Revolution — the theoretical basis for Grant's insistence that the bourgeoisie cannot complete the democratic revolution in the colonial world.
- Ted Grant, The Unbroken Thread — a collection of Grant's writings that situates this article within his broader political trajectory.
- In Defence of Marxism, "Kashmir: A Poisoned Legacy of Imperialism" — a contemporary article that updates Grant's analysis for the current conjuncture.
- Against the Stream, episodes on South Asia — podcast discussions that explore the ongoing relevance of the socialist federation proposal.
Key Quotes¶
"The war between India and Pakistan is a reactionary war on both sides. It is a war between two rival bourgeoisies, each seeking to defend its own interests and to extend its influence at the expense of the other."
"The only way to solve the national question in the subcontinent is not by supporting one or other of the rival bourgeoisies, but by the establishment of a socialist federation of the whole of the Indian subcontinent."
"The Indian bourgeoisie, which once played a progressive role in the struggle against British imperialism, has long since become a conservative force, tied to the landlords and the imperialists."
"The working class of India and Pakistan have no interest in this war. Their interests are identical. They are both exploited by their own ruling classes and by imperialism."
"The slogan 'Neither India nor Pakistan' is not a negative slogan. It is the positive slogan of a socialist federation of the workers and peasants of the whole subcontinent."
"The Kashmir question cannot be solved by the rival bourgeoisies. It can only be solved by the united struggle of the workers and peasants of both countries against their common enemies: capitalism and imperialism."