|
The Girmit Focus
By Satish C. Rai
These articles appeared in the Australian newspaper Indian
Link’s Girmit Link page from August 2004
August ’04 issue
Today
the word Girmit is becoming a popular currency to describe a
group of Indians who left the shores of India more then a
century ago to fulfil labour needs of the British and other
European colonial empires. Udnder the
Indian indenture system some 1.2 million Indians signed an
agreement (‘Girmit’) of indenture and sailed away to more than
ten European colonies to work on plantations formerly worked for
free by the African slaves.
The process of transporting non-European
labour to work for the Europeans began a few decades after
Columbus set his sights on the Caribbean in 1492, while looking
for India. After the Spaniards and other Europeans murdered most
of the natives of newly found lands in the Americas and the
Caribbean and captured their land, they needed labour to work
for them. At this stage the most inhuman transportation of human
began in the modern history of mankind. It is estimated that
some 40 million Africans from the African sub-continent were
enslaved by the Europeans and put into ships for the Americas.
Most of them perished during the journey. Those who survived
were sold off to the planters in auctions. The slaves worked for
free for the planters till the end of their natural lives. This
process continued till 1834, when slavery was officially
abolished. Most of the former slaves refused to work for their
former master.
The refusal of former slaves to work on the
plantations created severe labour problems for the planters in
the colonies. By this time the British had also colonised India
and through practices such as introduction of land tax system
(i.e. lagaan) they contributed towards the deprivation of people
in many parts of India. These areas thus provided fertile
grounds for the British to recruit and replace the slave labours
in many of their colonies, including Mauritius, Guyana, Trinidad
& Tobago, Surinam, Jamaica, South Africa and Fiji. The Indian
indentured labour system started in 1834 and by its conclusion
in 1916, transported some 1.2 million Indians from Uttar
Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan, Punjab,
Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Kerala. In the process of
indenture system the Indian recruits signed an agreement
(pronounced “Girmit’ by the Indians) to work in the colonies for
a fixed term. Although many of the girmityas returned to India
at the end of their Girmit terms, many stayed back in the
colonies for various reasons.
Today the descendants of these girmityas
number some ten million globally. In the case of Fiji, some
60,500 Indians left India to serve out their Girmit. About 40%
(25,000) returned to India but for various reasons, the rest of
them stayed back in Fiji. Now the Indo-Fijian Diaspora numbers
some 750,000 people. While most of them (approximately 350,000)
still live in Fiji, the rest are scattered around the Pacific
Rim countries of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA.
The amazing and sometimes heartbreaking
stories of the Fiji and other girmityas will be related via this
column in the future issues. Anyone wishing to add to this
subject can send his or her contribution to Satish Rai via
rai2@iprimus.com.au.
September
‘04 issue
In the previous issue I provided a very broad
picture of Girmit-the indenture labour system that had replaced
the African slavery in 1834 and which took some 1.2 million
Indians to many British and other colonies between 1834 and
1916. Over the years many researchers and writers have tried to
understand and explain the reasons behind girmit and the process
that was responsible for taking so many Indians away from their
homeland and keeping them in the far away lands permanently. The
task for the researchers on the girmit system has been made very
difficult because of lack of any reliable documentation about
the system throughout its 84 years history. Even after its
abolition in 1916, no great attempt was made by the girmityas
and their descendants to document the history first hand from
the girmityas who remained in the colonies and continued to
labour for the plantation owners. The only reliable document
still available about the girmitiyas home and next of kin in
India is contained in the indenture agreement (girmit) passes
each girmitya had signed upon recruitment in India. The colonial
officers in the colonies made records of the arrival,
settlement, marriages, birth, deaths and return of each girmitya
to India upon his or her girmit contract in the colonies.
However precious little documentation ever existed about what
happened to the girmityas during and after the end of their
girmit. In the absence of any substantial amount of information
about the 1.2million girmityas and their descendants, many of
those who attempted to study the girmit system and the girmitya
communities around the world generally speculated about both.
Judging from the existing literature on atleast Fiji girmityas I
am inclined to conclude that many of the accounts of the girmit
and the girmityas was far from accurate and have done much harm
to the proper understanding of the subject and the community.
They have gone a long way to project a very negative view of the
girmityas and the places in Indian from where they have come
from. As a result even today most of the descendants do not know
many aspects of the girmit and the sacrifices of their
hardworking ancestors. I will allude to these issues in my
future writings.
October‘04 issue
In my previous article I have asserted that
much of the existing work done on girmit in Fiji has portrayed a
rather negative image of the Indians who came to Fiji as
indentured workers as well as the places in India from where
they came from. One would expect negative images of India and
Indians from Euro-centric writers, but it is surprising that
some of the Indo-Fijian writers have written in similar vein. As
a former anti-racist professional and researcher on Euro-centric
racism, it troubled me to see the victims of colonialism writing
negatively about their own colonial pasts and their effects on
their own people. I feet the reason for this attitude could not
be attributed to lack of proper understanding and knowledge. I
felt the reasons for this must be deeper seated and the mystery
was revealed recently when I revisited the history of British
Raj in India. It was during the British Raj that the girmityas
were transported all over the world and in order to understand
the reasons for their transportation it is crucial to understand
the role of British Raj in India.
During my research on British Raj I read an
interesting article that helped me to understand the
Euro-centric leanings of some of the Indo-Fijian writers. The
article stated that the handful of British who ruled over India
needed locals to support them in their quests in India. They
started British schools in India and started producing Indian
babus in their own images. They used these babus to do their
dirty work. Over the years this process became a tradition all
over the colonies, including Fiji. This process has been
labelled as ‘mimicking the coloniser’. The British ruled Fiji
from 1874 till 1970. I still remember that during our primary
school days we had to salute English flag and sing ‘God save the
Queen’ each morning. Fortunately for some of us the mimicking
process was cut short while we were still young. For others
before us I suspect this process was completed by the time the
British left Fiji in 1970. With this type of education and
living under the colonial system during their formative years I
am not surprised to read Euro-centric views emanating from their
writings on girmityas and the land of girmityas.
In order to have any productive understanding
of the girmit, a direct product of British colonialism, it is
vital to have a proper understanding the historic role of the
global British colonialism. Without having a deep understanding
of the events which led up to Fiji’s girmit, one would not be
able to do justice to the understanding of the issues and events
which led up Fiji’s girmit and the effects of girmit system on
the girmityas and their descendants thereafter.
I feel that any misrepresentation of the facts
and issues about Fiji’s girmit is damaging. Several existing
misrepresentations have already led the descendants of the
girmityas and other observers to get wrong information and thus
ideas about the history and role of girmitiya of Fiji.
November ‘04 issue
Another negativity about the Fiji girmitiyas
that has been promoted by some of the existing writers is that
the girmitiyas “fled” India to settle in Fiji. The evidence
coming to light now reveals that the truth is far from that.
Little first hand evidence now exists regarding the real reasons
why the Indians took up the indenture to Fiji. In absence of
such evidence one has to rely on the circumstantial evidence and
some lateral thinking to understand the reasons why some 60500
Indians decided to leave their homes in India in the first place
and why some 40,000 never returned to India ever. There is
little evidence to suggest that the Indian girmitiyas to Fiji
“fled” India to settle in Fiji permanently. The strongest
evidence against this are the indenture agreement passes
themselves which each of the girmitiyas “agreed” to before
leaving India for Fiji. The indenture agreements between the
Indians and the recruiters specifically states in writing that
the Indians were contracted to work in Fiji for a fixed term of
five years (after which they had to pay their passage back to
India) or ten years (after which they would get a free passage
back to India). The agreement does not state anywhere that the
indentured Indians would stay in Fiji permanently. Thus the only
written document between the girmitiyas and the colonial
recruiters still in existence clearly states that the Indian
migration to Fiji was temporary and they would return to India
after five or ten years of labour in Fiji. The fact that the
majority of the early Indians did return to India after expiry
of their temporary labour contracts in Fiji goes a long way to
prove that the journeys of the girmitiyas to Fiji was always
meant to be for a fixed term, after which they would return to
their homes in India. So the question of “fleeing’ their homes
in India does not really arise at all. Therefore it is really
baffling why so many of the writers on Fiji girmit have
suggested that the Fiji girmitiyas “fled” India to seek refuge
in Fiji. It is my view that by doing so they have done great
disservice to the girmitiyas and their descendants. The other
interesting point I will discuss in future is why so many
Indians did end up staying in permanently.
December ‘04 issue
Some of the common terms I have come across in
the existing literature on Fiji girmitiyas is that they fled
from the poverty in India and that they were illiterates and
were easily fooled by others. I have difficulties with these
types of depictions of the brave Indians who had embarked upon
the fateful and adventurous journeys to Fiji. I admit that
poverty existed in India at that time, as it exists in parts of
modern India today. But one has to put that in some sort of
perspective. Poverty existed in all the countries around the
world at that time, even in England, which at that time presided
upon a colonial empire so large that it is said that the sun
never set down on it. On the other hand India was among the
richer nations in the world in that era and beyond. One should
realize that one of the main reasons the new world was
‘discovered’ by the Europeans accidentally was when they were
searching for the sea route to trade with India after the land
route to India was in the hands of the dreaded Ottoman empire
which was then threatening to conquer the entire Europe.
So at the time the Europeans started their
exploits in India, it has been trading internationally for many
centuries. Historical evidence suggests India had well developed
industries and fared better then its many conquers. Although
just like any other nation India had many internal problems, it
was a very cultured country with unbroken history going back
some five thousand years. It is said that India has the
distinction of being the only country in the world that has
continuous history of such length. Apart from the culture and
traditions that have been passed down to the succeeding
generations verbally through songs and dialogues, India has the
distinction and privilege to have such knowledge-based epics
such as the four Vedas, the Upnishads, the Puranas, the Ramayana
and the Gita. It is therefore not difficult to assume that in
such country learning of the essences of such epics in one form
or the other must have been a way of life for every person. I
assume that most of the girmityas, who went to Fiji irrespective
of cast or creed, must have had the benefit of the teachings of
some of these great epics and recipients of the rich Indian
cultural values. Therefore in my view labeling the girmityas
with terms such as “illiterates” without qualifications is not
only demeaning to the departed souls but also to India itself.
The girmityas should be looked as individuals
who were the products of India’s rich culture and traditions.
Before falling into the historical trap of the despicable girmit
system, each of them were part of a well established social
system that has been in existence for centuries, if not
millenniums. Each of them had a village they belonged to, a
family system, parents, perhaps brothers and sisters, uncle and
aunts, friends and relatives. Each of them performed his or her
social function at the time they were plucked from their
environs and thrust in the dreaded girmit depot. They had minds,
hearts, souls and feelings; they were human beings. The British
treated them as farm animals. But we Indians should atleast
treat them as human beings. After all, they were one of us.
January ’05 issue
In the last issue I provided an alternative
view to Indians “fleeing” India during girmit period. Some of
the writers who have put forward this view also talk about the
“push factors” in India which made the girmitiyas “flee” India.
Giving reasons such as extreme poverty, draught and such like,
false impression has been provided to the readers not aware of
facts that there was great rush among Indians of the girmit
period to “flee” their homelands for better quality of life
elsewhere. However there are several facts, which suggest that
the “push factors” listed by some of the writers, were not
sufficient to compel Indians of that period to make a dash out
of India. Firstly during the girmit period that lasted from 1838
to 1916, some 1.2 million Indian left India in search of
employment in the colonies. In comparison during the second wave
of Indian large migration post world war two the number of
Indians migrating to countries such as UK, the USA, Canada,
Australia and New Zealand in search of employment is more than
five million.
Secondly, if the push factor in India was so
large then the British colonial recruiters would not have set up
such a large and coercive recruitment system in India in order
to induce the Indians to go to the colonies as labourers. The
Indian recruiters found it so difficult to recruit sufficient
numbers to fulfil the labour demands in the colonies that they
had to resort to kidnapping and many forms of deceit to get
vulnerable Indians to agree to go to the colonies. It is not
uncommon to hear the present day Indians living in Australia,
New Zealand, Canada and the USA to say that the girmitiyas fled
India to live in the colonies and as such they and their
descendants are not “true” Indians. Careful analysis of the
facts behind them leaving India will definitely reveal that the
truth is far from that. The truth is that the girmitiyas were
deceived into leaving India on short-term labour contracts and
majority of who stayed back permanently in the colonies did so
not out of their own will.
February ’05 issue
In this issue I would like to provide some
information as to why so many of the Indentured Indian labourers
(now known as the girmitiyas), remained in Fiji after their 5
year contracts expired. As per their terms of labour contract
they were free after that and could return to India after paying
for their return passage. However if they chose to remain in
Fiji for additional 5 years the colonial government would pay
their passage back to India, including that of their children,
either born in India or in Fiji. In the initial years of the
girmit, which started in 1879, majority of the Indians took
advantage of the agreed to free passage back to India and
returned home. Some left after 5 years, paying their own passage
back and some left prior to their 5 year contract, paying the
colonial government money to get out of their contracts (girmit),
as well as paying for their passage back home. In all 24,
655(40.7%) out of the total of 60,537 Indians returned home to
India. The fact that so many Indians were returning to India
initially ran contrary to the designs of the colonial government
of Fiji and the plantation owners for whom the Indians were
brought to Fiji for. Although return of the Indians to their
homes in India was as per their contracts, the deceitful
expectations of the colonial government of Fiji and the planters
were for the Indians to remain in Fiji indefinitely and continue
to provide cheap labour. This would reduce cost of importing
fresh labourers in place of those returning home as well as
saving cost on free repatriation back to India. As one way to
induce the Indians to remain in Fiji indefinitely, the British
insisted on a quota of 40 women to every 100 men contracted to
Fiji. This is despite great objections from the planters of
Fiji, who felt that women made poor quality workers on farms.
Apart from social considerations behind having indentured women
in Fiji, the main reason behind the colonial government’s policy
on having greater number of indentured women was that they will
set home with males counterparts in Fiji during their indenture
period, which will make them reluctant to return to India after
expiry of their contracts. Eventually they and their children
will form a pool of labour supply in Fiji, sufficient in number
to enable the colonial government to reduce and eventually stop
the costly recruitment of Indian labourers to Fiji. The fact
that the majority of free Indians were returning to India was
frustrating this deceitful hidden recruitment aim of the
colonial government of Fiji. It had to continue to bear the cost
recruiting new Indians and pay passages of those returning home.
At the time of their arrival in Fiji the vast majority of the
indentured Indians were below age of 30. Hence those returning
home after 10 years had many years of labour remaining in them.
This and the fact that much money was being wasted in
recruitment and repatriation were not palatable to the colonial
government. Additionally new threat to continued supply of
indentured labour to Fiji was confronting the colonial
government and the planters in Fiji in the form of public outcry
for abolition of the indenture system throughout the colonies.
These factors combined to pose huge threat to the sugarcane and
other plantation-based industries in Fiji. The Colonial Sugar
Refinery Company (CSR) of Australia had by this time invested
enormous amount of money into the four sugar mills and huge
sugarcane plantations in Fiji. The sugarcane industry was the
pillar on which Fiji’s economy resting. The survival of the
sugarcane industry in turn rested upon the labour of Indians.
Should supply of Indian labour reduce substantially or dry up,
Fiji’s sugar industry will go down and with that Fiji’s economy
as well. The colonial government and the planters in Fiji had to
take drastic actions to ensure continued supply of Indian labour
in Fiji. The fact that they succeeded in that is well known.
However not much has been written as to how they managed to keep
the later day indentured Indian labourers in Fiji permanently.
March’05 issue
In the last issue I promised to expose why
some 40,000 indentured labours brought to Fiji on short-term
labour agreements (girmit) ended up staying permanently in Fiji.
But before I do that I wish to inform you of what was happening
politically at that time in relation to the Indian indenture
system (girmit system). At the turn of 19th century the girmit
system had been around for some 70 years, having replaced the
African slave system in supplying labour to the European
colonies in many parts of the world. In Fiji's case the girmit
has been around for some 20 years only. At the beginning of the
twentieth century call for abolition of the dreadful girmit
system was gaining currency not only in the girmit colonies but
also in India and England. The period between 1900 and 1920 saw
an international political drama about girmit that involved many
agencies, political groups, business concerns, governments and
famous political leaders such as Gandhi and Churchill. There
were mainly two groups, one for the abolition of girmit and the
other for retaining the system. There was a third group of
agencies that were caught in the middle of this international
wrangle. The plantation owners in the colonies wanted to retain
the girmit system for continuation of their business interests;
the girmitiyas and their sympathisers in India and England were
fighting to abolish the system.
In Fiji the largest player in Fiji's economy,
the Australian owned Colonial Sugar Refinery Company (CSR), were
fighting vigorously to keep the system going. By this time they
had invested very heavily in Fiji, owning all the sugar mills
and many thousands of acres of sugarcane farms. For both the CSR
needed continued supply of girmitiya labour; if the girmit
system was abolished, it was certain that the CSR in Fiji would
collapse dramatically.
The colonial government in Fiji was in support
of the system to continue because it could not afford to let the
CSR go down in Fiji. In many ways Fiji's economy was directly
supported by the CSR and it exerted great influence on the
colonial government in Fiji. It would not be wrong to say that
the colonial government in Fiji was a puppet in the hands of the
CSR at that time.
In many was the British government in London
had to support its Fijian governors on this issue, despite
pressures from the anti-abolition lobby there. The Indian
government (the Raj) was caught in between in this episode; it
did not want to displease the colonial government in Fiji but at
the same time it could no longer ignore the growing political
force in India. The Indian congress was growing in power and
influence and it had found the girmit cause to embarrass the Raj.
India's top leaders such as Gokhle, Chaturvedi, Gandhi and
Andrews were championing the girmit cause now and the Raj had to
please them as well.
The great international girmit drama was
played out for some twenty years until girmit was finally
abolished by 1920 all around the world. While the political
drama was being played the interests of girmitiyas were
sacrificed as pawns. While the fate of the future of the girmit
system was played out for two decades, the fate of the
girmitiyas already in Fiji was put on hold.
April ’05 issue
The end of girmit system heralded permanent
girmit for Fiji girmitiyas
In this issue I will reveal how the British
colonial government, the Colonial Sugar refinery Company (CSR),
an Australian based company and the white planters in Fiji
connived to keep some 35,000 temporary indentured Indian workers
permanently in Fiji. I have already stated that the remainder
(approximately 25,000) of some 60,500 indentured workers
recruited between 1879 and 1916 had returned to India after
completing their terms of indenture agreement (girmit). Writing
about the 60 % who were forced to settle in Fiji Gillion writes:
‘Although most of these had not originally intended to settle
abroad permanently, settlement had always been envisaged by the
promoters of the indentured labour system’ (Gillion, 1962 p
136). Many efforts were made by these people to keep the early
girmitiyas permanently in Fiji but there were not many takers;
majority of the girmitiyas chose to return to India. By the end
of the 19th century however due to large scale opposition to the
girmit system both in Fiji, India, other colonies and England,
the supply of girmit labour was to dry up when last of the
girmitiyas returned to India after their girmit was over in
Fiji. (The small number of girmitiyas who stayed back in Fiji
voluntarily was not sufficient to maintain the sugar industry in
the colony). The Colonial government in Fiji and the white
‘masters’ of the Indian girmitiyas, headed by the CSR had to
find new way to keep the girmitiyas in Fiji to ensure economic
viability of their enterprises. They drew up multiple strategies
to achieve their aim to have continued supply of the girmit
labour. These strategies included appeasement, divide and rule
tactics and change of rules of indenture agreement that in the
end prevailed. The tactics of the white people were so clever
that none of the individuals and the organizations engaged in
the abolition of the girmit system got a whiff of what was
happening. By the time the CSR and its allies secured a
permanent supply of girmit labour for their enterprises in Fiji,
their oppositions had lost the plot altogether. They had managed
to get rid of the indenture system in Fiji and elsewhere, but
failed to stop permanent girmit for the remaining Fiji
girmitiyas and many of their descendants. Even today more then
100,000 descendants of the girmitiyas are serving a form of
girmit on the farms and factories of Fiji on living conditions
not too dissimilar to the ones endured by their fore parents.
Here are the main strategies used by the CSR and its allies to
consign the Fiji girmitiyas to the permanent state of girmit in
Fiji.
Firstly in 1906 they managed to install a very
important term of the indenture designed to keep the girmitiyas
permanently in Fiji. Previous to this change the girmitiyas and
their children had indefinite time period to claim free passage
back to India after their 10-year girmit terms. Until the change
majority of them in fact returned to India under this term.
After 1906 the girmitiyas and their children born in Fiji had
only two years after the end of their 10-year term in Fiji to
claim free passage back to India. Their children born in India
could not claim free passage after 24th birthday. The effect of
this change was that after expiry of the two years in which this
claim could be made the girmitiyas and their child did not have
a free passage back to India. The intention behind this change
was to hoodwink the girmitiyas for the intervening two years and
then deprive them and their children of entitlement to free
passage back to India. By this time there would normally be up
to six to ten members in the family and it would have been
impossible for the girmitiyas to pay their and their families’
passage back to India. In order to quell the uprising that was
obvious once many of the girmitiyas realized what was happening,
the CSR and its allies utilized divide and rule tactics they are
renowned for.
Up to the turn of 19th century almost all of
the Fiji girmitiyas came from the Hindi-speaking belt of
Northern Province, mainly from Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and
Bihar. Realizing that it would be easier for these girmitiyas to
band together to resist the conspiracy to keep them permanently
in Fiji, they decided to dilute their power to do that. The CSR
and the colonial government would have heard about the 1857
Sepoy rebellion, the first battle for independence from the
British Raj fought in Uttar Pradesh. It was a bloody battle in
which many British and Indian lives were lost. Organizations
were formed in UP around the end of 19th century to abolish
girmit. Thoughts of an uprising in Fiji against the endeavours
to deceive the girmitiyas to remain permanently must have
crossed the minds of the deceivers in Fiji.
So they decided to reduce recruitment from
North India and supplement the required quota from South India.
The first batch of girmitiyas from the South thus started in
1903. From 1903 up to end of the girmit system recruitment from
the North India was reduced to approximately half. Even in the
south girmitiyas were deliberately recruited from a very large
area, spanning three different cultural and linguistic groups
consisting of Tamil, Telgu and Malayalam from Tamil Nadu, Kerala
and Andhra Pradesh. An examination of the main areas of
recruitment in the south, namely Tanjore, Chengleput, Arcot,
Palghat, Coimbatore, Vijaywada and Godavari, shows that these
areas are many hundreds of kilometres apart, making recruitment
and travel to Madras for shipment to Fiji extremely difficult
task, time consuming and expensive for the recruiters. It begs
the question why they resorted to this venture when the North
had been providing sufficient girmitiyas to Fiji and elsewhere
for many decades. Even if recruitment from the south was
desired, which traditionally did not provide many girmitiyas to
other girmit colonies as well, recruitment could have been
confined to areas closer to Madras, such as Chengleput and Arcot.
One can conclude that this elaborate and expensive strategy was
deemed necessary by the CSR and its allies to prevent the
girmitiyas to come together to effectively resist their attempt
to deceive the girmitiyas to remain in Fiji permanently and
serve them unhindered. For many years to come the girmitiyas
from the North and the south could not communicate effectively
due to language cultural barriers, which in fact existed among
the Tamil, Telgu and Malayalam speaking people from the south
themself as well.
In order to placate the girmitiyas who had
forfeited their rights to return to India the CSR offered them
small pieces of land on short-term leases. (This scheme had been
offered to the free girmitiyas before as an attempt to
permanently settle them in Fiji but hardly any of them took the
offer, choosing to return to India instead). However now they
had no choices but to till the land for the CSR until their
leaders found ways for them to return them to India. The first
world war came handy for the CSR too. They took advantage of
this and stopped providing ships to the girmitiyas to return to
India. The deceit and the confusion surrounding the girmit and
the world war meant that girmitiyas could not get free return
passage to India and majority of them were forced to remain in
Fiji permanently in Fiji. Gillion notes that only in 1921 ships
were provide to take some 4,000 girmitiyas back to India. No
record of any further ships taking intending girmitiyas back to
India is available.
The final year in which the last of the post
1906 girmitiyas could take advantage of free passage back to
India was 1928 i.e. 1916 plus two years. Leading up to this
period much drama was played out at international stage to
reform the girmit system. Fiji girmitiyas were placated with
promises of reforms and delegations from India to look into
their complaints. However soon after 1928 all these activities
plus protests from India stopped suddenly. The CSR and its
allies had conned the girmitiyas and their sympathizers in
India. They succeeded in keeping some 35,000 girmitiyas to
permanently work for them in Fiji. Gillion and other have
written that the girmitiyas in Fiji celebrated when it was
announced in January 1920 that all the contracts of Fiji
girmitiyas were quashed and they were free. They burnt effigies
of CSR and the ‘coolumbars’ the CSR overseers who worked them
with iron fists and whips. But CSR and its allies had the
greatest cause to rejoice. Faced with total elimination of
girmit labour at the turn of the 19th century, thirty years
later they had in their captivity some 35,000 Indian girmit
‘coolies’ who were at their disposal indefinitely, without
interference from anti-girmit groups in India and England.
Without much money, effective leadership, freehold land and
rights in Fiji, these girmitiyas were ripe for exploitation by
the CSR, who by this time were the uncrowned rulers of Fiji. The
35,000 girmitiyas ensured continuous supply of labour to Fiji
with the cost and effort to recruit fresh girmitiyas from India
each year. In a masterstroke the CSR and its allies got what
they wanted and much more. The Indians were stumped and no one
realized how it was even done to date. Soon after 1928 all the
protests against the girmit in India stopped. They may also have
celebrated that they played a part in the abolition of the
girmit system. Perhaps they did not realize that the end of the
system of girmit recruitment did not end the girmit of those who
were now captive in Fiji. These girmitiyas were consigned to
serve the CSR for rest of their lives. For majority of them
their lives after 1920 did not change dramatically in their
favour. They continued to be exploited by the CSR under
conditions not too much different from the girmit era. There was
the additional over bearing burden of realization that they will
never return to their homes in India. The vast majority of them
never did! Many of their descendants continued to toil the land
for the CSR until they departed in 1971. CSR’s departure from
Fiji did not change the fate of many of the Indian farmers in
Fiji. Still without rights to buy their own land, they continued
to toil for the native Fijians. After the political turmoils in
Fiji, since 1997 thousands of these farmers have been evicted
from their leased land. Presently thousands of the descendants
of the ‘captive’ girmitiyas of Fiji are living squatter
settlements scattered throughout Fiji, providing cheap labour to
new Australian enterprises and non-girmitiya businesses in Fiji.
Despite successes of a section of Indians in Fiji, a larger
section continues to provide cheap labour to Fiji.
It is not possible to provide all the evidence
to support my claim that the most of the Fiji girmitiyas were
tricked into remaining permanently. This is a new area of
research on Fiji girmitiyas and the work is continuing. I hope
the above will create new awareness about the nature of Fiji
girmitiyas and compel people to re-examine the subject.
Next I will give my view on how things could
have been for the girmitiyas and their descendants if it was
realized by the Indian leadership that the girmitiyas did not
choose to stay back in Fiji but were forced to stay there
permanently.
Satish Rai Satish
Rai was born in the sugar city of Fiji and after completing is
primary and secondary studies he was offered to undertake to
study medicine at the University of South pacific. However after
two years he felt that Humanity and Arts was his interest and
started to study Sociology. In 1980 he migrated to UK where he
subsequently completed Sociology Degree with honour and then
went on to do his MA. In the meantime he served as an elected
councillor in London Borough of Green council (1990-94) and
worked for London Borough of Newham as a Principal Anti-Racist
officers. During this period he wrote a novel 'Silent Cries' on
development of Euro centric racial ideology, which he later
produced as a play. After migrating to Australia in 1995 he
completed his MA degree and focused his efforts towards
journalism and filmmaking. He also concentrated his efforts
towards research on Indo-Fijians and tracing roots of
descendants of Indentured Indian labourers. He stated Milaap-Discover
Your Indian Roots Project and went to India several times to
make documentary films on this subject. In 2004 he was offered a
candidature to undertake research for Doctor in Creative Arts by
the University of Western Sydney on subject of Identity among
Indian community of Fiji from the indenture era to present day.
|