Any anti-colonial efforts — and particularly those that crossed racial lines to emphasize solidarity, like Rai and Du Bois’s collective efforts — were met with political repression. Fearing the movement that could emerge from this cross-racial solidarity, imperialist powers, especially the British and their allies, took many actions to restrict the efforts of Indian activists within the United States borders. C.R. Cleveland, the British director of the Department of Criminal Intelligence, requested the American consulate in Calcutta intervene to suppress the Indian nationalists circumventing sedition laws by publishing their anti-colonial papers in the US. While this specific request was rejected by the US State Department, the consul general began questioning United States-bound South Asian immigrants “to determine whether they were in sympathy with sedition in India or not.” On U.S. soil, the British distinctly feared New York City, seeing it as a key ground of Irish-Indian collaboration. The Irish were described by British intelligence as “ready to take up any movement likely to embarrass the British Government,” and likely to forge political alliances with immigrating Indians.
Consequently, even though many dissident South Asians arrived in the United States with hopes of escaping or avoiding British political surveillance, they were systematically profiled, questioned, and punished by American officials at the recommendation of British intelligence. The British’s requests were particularly appealing to the US intelligence community, playing into their fear that Indian revolutionaries fighting for home rule could inspire similar sentiments in the United States’ colonized Philippines. Both British and American colonial regimes feared rebellion in their profitable colonies: suppression of anti-colonial thought and activism was, to them, necessary, to avoid the entire system toppling to the ground. By the end of World War I, the effects of the government’s repression were widespread. The Justice Department ordered Lajpat Rai to stop circulating anti-British materials, even those printed within the United States. And the New York Times, alongside other large publications, stopped covering the work of prominent activists, preventing the spread of information about the Indian independence movement.
