Netaji Bose Papers An Investigation into the Funds of the Indian National Army and the Indian Independence League

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

The Netaji Bose Papers recently declassified by the Government of Hon ble Narendra Modi provides a wealth of details about how the Nehruvian Regime sought to appropriate the entire legacy of this great Patriot. And in so doing left itself open to the charge of mishandling sensitive political and diplomatic issues.

The INA under Subash Chandra Bose collected contributions towards the war effort from the Indian population in Singapore and Malaya. It is safe to assume that the fiscal levies were voluntary contributions though war time measures did warrant a degree of coercion. The Azad Hind Fauj and the Provisional Government headed by Subash Chandra Bose maintained distinct and separate identities. The funds collected by the Government were deposited with banks located in Singapore and Thailand. After the defeat of Japan and its surrender, the Allied Forces moved in and claimed INA assets as "enemy property" and Nehru, a trained lawyer thought it fit to allow negotiations with the Allied Command in Singapore to be carried out under the pretence that INA assets were "enemy property". Of course, the presence of Lord Mountbatten helped Nehru get the support he needed to push his policy through. Apparently a part of the funds were held in a personal account in the name of the Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. 

The file F.23 generated by V M M Nair is mere 24 pages but if a historian reads it against the grain so the speak it reveals a great deal. The file begins with a Note from Nair stating that one Hardyal Singh of Singapore was keen to give the INA Gold in his custody back to the Government of India. The legal issue being that the Singapore authorities considered any asset belonging to the INA or the Government he headed as enemy property and Jawaharlal Nehru blithely walked into a trap. He conceded that Pakistan has a share in the INA Assets in the proportion 2: 1. How Nehru arrived at this strange conclusion that Pakistan was entitled to a share of the INA and Provisional Government Assets is utterly bewildering. This decision ranks alongside the other infamous decision taken by Nehru to refer to the Kashmir dispute to the United Nations. INA assets were seized as enemy property and a receiver was appointed to settle the claims, if any, of India. The claim of Pakistan did not arise as these were not National Property. Nehru was quite ignorant of law and legal precedence.

The file reveals that around Rs 10 lakhs were eventually transferred to the account of the Indian Mission in Siam now Thailand. The Ministry of Education thought it fit to use the Funds as seed capital to finance visits by Indian scholars to Thailand in pursuance of the then prevailing notions of Greater India and chose Dr R C Majumdar as its first nominee for the award. Nehru was aghast that the decision was taken without his consent and made his rebuke plain in a Note sent to one Humayun Kabir, then Additional Secretary in the Ministry of Education. R C Majumdar declined the offer and T N Ramachandran the Joint Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India was eventually nominated. The papers do not reveal if Shri T N Ramachandran availed of the fellowship.

Much of the Correspondence in the file is handled by Shah Nawaz Khan who in 1952 was a Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport. This Shah Nawaz was instrumental in enabling the Indian National Congress appropriate the legacy of Subash Chandra Bose.  Curiously Shah Nawaz was Minister of Food in Shasti's Cabinet in 1965 when his son was a Captain in the Pakistani Army. This individual has had several walk on parts on the stage of Indian history at a crucial juncture. As the Chief defendant in the INA Trial at the Red Fort Shah Nawaz was defended by a galaxy of legal luminaries and though he was sentenced to death for treason, the sentence was commuted and he along with Major Dhillon and another Officer was cashiered from the Army. 

The Legal Defence mounted on behalf of Shah Nawaz was a classic instance of the Rule of Law serving political goals which were quietly given the go by once the Red Fort Trials ended. Shah Nawaz himself became a Member of Parliament and was elected four times in all and lost in 1967 and 1977. The grounds on which it was argued in the Red Fort Trials that the defendants had not committed treason was on the grounds the the Provisional Government of Azad Hind headed by Bose was a legally constituted Government with due international recognition and having all elements of sovereignty, territory, population, Army Judiciary etc. And as such they were soldiers fighting on behalf of their Government against an occupation force. This argument was politically an explosive one in that it threatened to blow the entire edifice of the Nehruvian claim that the legitimate government to which power was transferred was his, and that was essentially the basis of the political consensus of Post Transfer  of Power India. The arguments presented in the Red Fort Trials make clear the fact that the Government of Bose was indeed a legitimate one and INA was not a rebel force but the legal Army of duly recognized Government that had declared war on the Allies.

Shah Nawaz in 1956 was appointed to head a Three Man Commission of Inquiry to look into the death of Subash Chandra Bose. By this time, Shah Nawaz was domesticated within the power structure of the Nehruvian regime and he gave a Report which essentially validated the contentions of the regime. It is certainly likely that Bose had indeed perished in the Crash of 18th August 1945 and by making Shah Nawaz the anchor of the theory, Nehru succeeded in completely neutralizing the political legacy of Subash Chandra Bose. Forward Bloc and the Family was now reduced to merely disputing the factual claim of the Air Crash and the Legacy of Bose was stolen clean.

Thus this file a mere 24 pages long illuminates a sordid chapter in the history of contemporary India.

Netaji Bose Papers: Renkoji Temple , INA Treasure and other Questions

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

The historical community owes an immense debt of gratitude to Narendra Modi for having declassified the files relating to the Netaji and putting them up in public domain. This Blog is based on two files both of which are available on the website of the National Archives. 

Unfortunately there is a glitch in the web site that prevented me from registering so that I could access other documents. The files relating to Netaji, around 100 in all are freely available though they cannot be downloaded or copied. The very fact that the Government has made the documents available shows a firm commitment to Historical truth. For nearly 70 years, since the Transfer of Power in 1947 Historiography remained a political tool in the hands of regime supported Leftist historians like Gopal, Bipan Chandra and Guha. The outrage that accompanied the publication of each volume of the carefully curated material found in the Towards Freedom volume bespeaks of the political dimensions of historical research and related questions about Nation, State and Society.

In the generally accepted orthodoxy that governs modern Indian Historiography, India acquired it freedom largely due to the Indian National Congress and an enshrined Triumvirate consisting of Gandhi, Nehru and Patel are the presiding deities. This simplistic and yes, self serving interpretation, ignores and at times deliberately distorts the contribution of other major figures such as Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, Subash Chandra Bose and Chandra Sekar Azad. Since the British transferred power in 1947 to Nehru after Partitioning the country, the political legitimacy of the ruling dispensation rested on absolving itself of all responsibility for the horrendous violence that accompanied the decision. In fact we may say that every step towards freedom was also a step towards Partition and the leadership of the Congress was blissfully unaware of its own excesses. Khilafat Movement, the boycott of the Cripps' Mission, the mass resignation from Office in 1939, the Quit India Movement in 1942 at the height of the War, the decision to contest Muslim reserved seats in the Provincial Elections of 1937 after the Government of India Act of 1935 were some of the more egregious missteps of the Congress. Making  virtue out  of necessity Indian "historians" merrily created the myth that these were giant steps towards the emergence of an idea of India that was secular, modern and inclusive. The fact that the Indian movement led by the  Congress resulted in the enforced Partition of India shows that the political movement led by the Congress was riddled with irreconcilable contradictions and as Perry Anderson argues in his Indian Ideology these contradictions animate political and ideological discourse in India until this day. 

It is against the inherent contradictions of Indian nationalist politics of the 1930s and 40s that the role of Subash Bose is best studied. Like his other great contemporary Savarkar, Bose came to the conclusion that agitational politics will not move the cause of Indian Independence forward and so chose to ally with Japan with whose help he wanted to liberate India by leading a military force by way of Burma to attack the North East frontier of India. The fact that several Naga and Kuki tribesman joined the INA  shows the wide appeal Bose had. The Congress launched the Quip India Movement in 1942 and in spite of the enormous repression inflicted on the people, the Movement achieved little except harden the British Government's resolve to divide India and Quit. Even though Japan lost the war as a consequence of the Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, the war had made political independence a distinct possibility. Almost all observers were agreed that the post war political order would be a changed one in which Asian nationhood would have a place. USA too had made its political position clear and therefore the emergence of Nation states in the post World War period was a consequence of the war. The contribution of Bose was important for the simple reason he showed the British that they could not return to India to rule. And in this Bose like Ho Chi Minh, Quezon, and Sukarno showed the limits of imperial rule.

II The Controversies, the Documents and the Truth

Sugata Bose, a Harvard Historian, a Trinamool Congres Politician, and a nephew of Netaji states in his biography of his famous uncle that Netaji wanted to surrender to the British forces as they advanced rapidly towards Singapore. There was a cabinet meeting and it was decided that Bose ought not to surrender. In retrospect the decision to escape capture was the right one. Had Bose surrendered the gaggle of regime friendly "historians" would have had a field day in much the same way as they demean and degrade the greatest of patriots, Savarkar.  The mystique of Netaji is furthered enhanced when he is seen as one who continued to defy the British even as he flew to his death in a blaze of martyrdom. Bose knew that his struggle was over with the defeat of Japan and on USSR entering the war Bose ran out of  options. He decided to enter Machuria and on August 18th 1945 he was headed toward Manchuria.

Did Netaji die in the crash at Teihoku Airfield. In dealing with this question we have to understand that both the British and their chosen collaborators to whom they transferred power in 1947, particularly the suave articulate and clever Jawahralal Nehru, who was the chosen heir of Gandhi, had virtually identical views as far as Bose was concerned. Nehru as the documents reveal continued to spy on the Bose family for decades. Within the Congress circles any mention of Bose was proscribed and Historians were directed to write a narrative of Freedom which airbrushes the role of Netaji. And they obliged. For long years the "Tryst with Destiny" excluded Netaji Bose and the triumphalism of Nehru's speech set the tone: Indian Independence was the achievement of those who "redeemed the pledge" and it does not take too much intelligence to understand who was meant by that telling phrase.

Nehru's regime treated Bose with scant respect. His place in the Freedom Movement has not been acknowledged.  Snide comments about his Military Uniform and his Alliance with Japan was labeled "fascist", the favorite abuse of these regime friendly "historians". Bose made his Alliance with Japan on the principle of Indian Statecraft that stated that an Enemy's enemy is a friend". And the Alliance was a Military not a  political one. However there is one aspect of Netaji's History as a leader of the Indian Struggle that we must not ignore. The atrocities of the Japanese in the Island of Andamans is remembered till this day and Netaji is tainted due to his association with the brutal and savage reprisals against Indians there. Of course Netaji perhaps was not aware of the ground realities. But then he bears some responsibility. Of course Bose bears no personal responsibility for the war crimes in the Andaman Islands as he spent only 2 days and a night in Port Blair. Though I am convinced that without Bose, India would not have become free, I am a Historian and so record the dark deeds as well.

Controversy over the death of Netaji has cast a huge shadow on Indian politics. Nehru was afraid that if Netaji was alive he could return and he knew that the public persona and appeal of Netaji was far more robust than his. The Intelligence Bureau was tasked to keep tabs. The Forward Bloc founded by Bose was active in Bengal politics. The BJP Government is able to deal with the Bose Questions fearlessly as its political legitimacy in no way gets diminished as a consequence of a Bose reentry into India. This is certainly not the case with the Congress. Bose is a symbol of defiance of both the Congress and the British and his legacy undermines the Congress system substantially. The dilemma of Nehru is clear from the records unveiled: He cannot accept the death of Netaji in the Air Crash of 1945 as that would enrage the supporters of Netaji and reignite the passions that had been set at rest. He cannot wish Netaji be alive as that would be a potent threat to his own legitimacy. A very difficult choice for Nehru and he got by as he is wont to do by prevaricating, grandstanding and cynical subterfuge.

In 1951 the priest of the Renkoji Temple where the Ashes of Bose were kept wanted the relics repatriated back to India. Nehru was terrified at this prospect. In fact the Priest complained as per the Note from the Embassy that India was "indifferent" towards a national hero who fought for India's freedom. This touched a raw nerve and the Government of India decided that the entire exercise of requesting the relics to be repatriated back to India was a mere pretext or ploy to increase the subvention of Rs 5000 which was paid to the Temple for keeping the relics. The Government decided to let the ashes remain in Japan till a "more favourable opportunity arose". 

In 1956 the Shah Nawaz Commission was appointed and it concluded that Netaji perished in the Air crash. Sugata Bose accepts this fact but the Forward Bloc whose founder was Netaji Bose was opposed to the finding of the Commission that the great Patriot had died in the August 18th 1945 Crash. When political will and courage are lacking, prevarication and deceit become easy substitutes for courage and conviction. The Note to the Cabinet makes the policy clear:

"As long as the ashes are kept in Japan, there would always be room for misgivings that the Government of India have not accepted the findings of the  Shah Nawaz Commission and the Khosla Commission regarding the death of Netaji". This passage is from 1977 a note written by R L Mishra on 21/07/1977.

The Parliamentarians Samar Gupta and Dr Subramanium Swamy were primarily responsible for raising the mystery of the INA Treasure and the Records show that the Government had much to hide in this matter as well. Shri Samar Gupta tabled a Motion before the Speaker on the issue of INA Treasure and Dr Swamy wrote to the then Prime Minister Shri Moraji Desai regarding the INA Treasure. And the files reveal some murky details. 

T C A Srinivasavardan the Home Secretary of the day put up a note on 17/11/1977 which gives some details of the Treasure but rejects further Inquiry. Netaji Bose was a prudent administrator and husbanded the resources of the Government well. On his birthday in 1945 he was weighed in Gold and if we assume that his weight was 70 kilos, the Treasury of Bose had at least 70 kilos of Gold. Of course we do not know how much of that gold was transferred on to the ill fated aircraft. What is intriguing is the clumsy manner in which this issue was handled which certainly reeks of a coverup.

A Note dating to the time of Nehru states that one Shri Damle who was a passenger traveling by air from Tokyo to New Delhi was approached by the Indian Ambassador whose name is not mentioned and was requested to carry a suitcase and hand it over immediately on arrival to the Prime Minister. Damle apparently sensed that something was amiss and stated that what should he do if he is checked by the Customs. The Ambassador told him that it would be taken care of. Upon arrival at New Delhi apparently B K Nehru was at hand to meet Damle and B K Nehru asked him to hand over the box. Damle remembering his instructions said that he will hand them over only to the Prime Minister. The date is November 10th 1952. The two drive to the PM's residence where the Box is opened and left in the custody of Nehru. Another note in the me file records that it remained in the Prime Minister's custody for a year before it was transferred to the National Museum. It is very curious that Nataji Treasure was sent to the National Museum and not to a Government vault for safe keeping. The note signed by Shri N S Sreeraman states that "Dr Subramanium Swamy has been relentlessly pursuing this matter". The value assessed was a mere 500,000 Rs. And therby hangs yet another scandal of the Nehruvian Age.

While it is likely that the legacy of Netaji Subash Chandra Bose has a huge future in Indian politics if he is exorcized of the contrived burdens thrust upon him by Jawaharlal Nehru.

 

Vellore Mutiny, July 10 1806 : A of review of Vellore Revolt, 1806

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

Vellore Revolt 1806

Dr K A Manikumar

VIT 

July 10, 1806 began like any other day in a cantonment of the East India Company. The oppressive Summer heat had yielded to some light showers and as the sun rose over Vellore on that day, the Sepoys of the Madras Army rose in revolt. They armed themselves and soon gathered in the parade ground to prepare for the attack on the Quarters of their officers. By the time the sun rose, more than 250 White Officers and their families had been killed and the handful of survivors has taken refuge in the Church in the Fort and in Cellars of buildings. They soldiers hunted them from their hiding places and slaughtered them. The savagery of the attacks was numbing. What lay behind this Revolt? 

The question has not been adequately answered as most historians were keen to establish the primacy of South India in general and the Tamil region, in particular, in embracing the cause of resistance to the rule of the East India Company and hence a precocious curtain raiser to the more spectacular Revolt of 1857. There is no doubt that the rule of the Company had torn the Moral Economy of South India and the agrarian changes particularly the resumption of land and its revenue by the Company after crushing the Polygar Uprising in 1803 had resulted in considerable distress. The caste composition of the Madras Army  essentially consisted  of Telugu warriors and peasants from the dry region of the  Peninsula, Tinnevelly, Ramnad, Madurai etc and social groups which were classified as "untouchable" particularly the "paraiah" caste. To this volatile mix was added the Palayamkottai Regiment which had taken part in the recent campaingns against Tippu Sultan in Mysore and in the expeditions against the Polygars. The presence of the deposed sons of the erstwhile ruler of Mysore in the Vellore Fort added an element of conspiracy to the entire event.

The "native" troops were seething with rage at the recent orders passed by General Craddock prohibiting the Sepoys from smearing their foreheads with "caste marks" and the leather cockade that was to be added to the turban was considered unclean. While these two grievance came to the fore in the Official Inquiry conducted by Lord William Bentinck as the Governor of Madras, more serious factors were at play. The brutal punishments inflicted on indigenous soldiers for minor infractions  was deeply resented. The Company has instituted a reign of terror to keep peace in the conquered regions and the Sepoys were flogged whipped and shot without trial or appeal. The savagery with which the Sepoys fell upon the white Officers can only be explained by deep felt resentment and hatred. 

By 9:30 the killings had stopped. The Sepoys were exhausted by their physically by the six hours of nearly non stop massacre, and having found the liquor stores of the white officers proceeded to indulge themselves, oblivious to the fact that they had even left the Main Gate of the Fort unguarded and had not noticed that at least a few White Officers and a handful of "loyal" soldiers had not been accounted for. As was the case in 1857, the soldiers lacked strategic sense and the ability to plan for the consequences.

Near Ambur, nearly 30 miles from Vellore Col Rollo Gillespie heard of the disturbances in the Fort from sepoy who had broken out of the fort. https://wordcraftandstatecraft.blogspot.com/2020/05/sir-rollo-

gillespie-and-battle-of.html. Without waiting for orders from Madras Gillespie rallied a handful of men and rode towards Vellore. He reached Vellore around four in the afternoon and chivied up the curtain wall of the Fort. With the few men at his command he managed to break into the Fort and the very sight of the Officer was enough to put the fear of God in the minds of the rebel soldiers.

The reprisal was swift and barbaric. Indian soldiers were quickly rounded up and  tied to the mouths of cannon and shot. A few of the Sepoys had taken shelter in the famous Jalakanteswara Temple, a late Vijayanagara temple located within the Fort. Till this day the walls of the inner sanctum bear the marks of the terrible battle that raged inside.

Jalakanteswara Temple

  By the time the Sun set over Vellore nearly 1500 sepoys lay dead. Col Gillespie extracted a tremendous price for the alleged disloyalty of the sepoys.  Was the Vellore Revolt an attempt at ridding India of Company Rule? Was it a vain effort to reinstall the sovereignty of the deposed Mysore usurpers? Was it a reaction to the cumulative grievances of  the Sepoys? Was it an atavistic attempt at stopping the Missionaries who were very active in the area. Historians are still debating.

The book Vellore Revolt 1806 by Dr Manikumar is an excellent introduction to these and other vexing issues surrounding the traic event that transpire on that July day in 1806.

THE INDISCREET CHARMS OF ENID BLYTON; POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IN THE LAND OF THE WOKE

A look at the world of politics, statecraft, diplomacy and books

Enid Blyton died at the age of 71 on November 28, 1968. Having written over 700 books and 4 500 short stories for children she ranks with Beatrix Potter and J K Rowling as one of the most celebrated writers of books meant exclusively for children. The recent decision of the Royal Mint not to honour her memory on a 50 pence coin on the ground that her work is " racist, xenophobic, and sexist " is not only misplaced but completely misses the enormous impact she had on those growing up is distant lands in a far more innocent age than our own. Racism is now a "Thought Crime" and anyone with views not conforming to the radical posturing of Wokedom is a racist and a whole litany of thought crimes are added to damn writers, politicians, actors and others. Enid Blyton is only the latest casualty of this kind of intellectual policing. Post colonial literary theories have fabricated a new aesthetic in which the anachronistic effusions of self righteousness often parade as criticism or worse a dog whistle for rounding up the proles. 

Enid Blyton (1897-1968)

I grew up reading Enid Blyton and as a child frankly did not find anything offensive in her writings. I bought a complete set of her Famous Five and Five Find-Outers and Dog for my daughter when she was 7 years old and could not resist the temptation of revisiting Peterswood, the rugged coast of Cornwall and capering round the world with Jack and his parrot Kiki in the Adventure Series even as I reread these books with my child. I can say that age has not withered nor custom staled the infinite charm of the world conjured up by Enid Blyton. To judge children's literature by a standard completely foreign to the age of the author is wrong and moral judgements can be invoked only if one sets out to propagate a set of values or ideology that one finds distasteful or abhorrent. Enid  Blyton wrote in a time and place less inflected with the pressure of flattening social and cultural spheres into homogenized wokeism.

Enid Blyton was born in 1897 in Dulwich, East London. As her daughter Gillian recounts in her biography of her mother, Enid Blyton was deeply attached to her father, Thomas Blyton who instilled in her a love for books, music, nature and animals. Enid Blyton set up several charities and trusts for animals and English Heritage must see beyond the narrow limits of self defeating political correctness while appreciating and memorializing her work. There is nothing but respect for Nature in her work. Even the baddies do not harm Nature and the lush English countryside is alive with flowers, shrubs and meadows all described in such vivid colours that to a child reading in distant India, the English countryside appears as natural as the mango tress and palm trees of his own drab world. The only instance when an animal almost comes to harm is in Mystery of the Holly Lane in which the hyper active dog, Buster, is accused by the rather unintelligent policeman Theophillus Goon of killing sheep. Reading Enid Blyton at an impressionable age will leave a child with a reverence nature and animals. 

What is the social world encompassed by Enid Blyton in her work. This is a large question. The Empire is hardly ever mentioned and it is very unlikely whether Enid Blyton had ever expressed any support or endorsed the Empire. Her characters were strangely far removed from the fast changing world that decolonization brought in its wake. The children like the Five Find-outers lived in sylvan villages in which the family was the stable unit and class determined one's place in society. Thus we find all service folk being entertained in the kitchen by the cook and even the village policeman accepts his station in life, without protest. Blyton wrote at a time when everyone knew his or her place in society. The vast changes after World War II that reshaped British Society were hardly at play during the years Enid was active writing. Britain was still a predominantly white country and it is therefore not surprising that all her characters are "white, pale and stale". 

The charge that Blyton was a racist needs to be refuted. Her character in Noddy's Toyland, Golliwog, may offend our sensibilities today. But did she intend a racial insult when she used Florence Upton's creation. Unlike Hardy Boys Series or Billy Bunter in which racist stereotypes prance around the pages, there is no overt racism in Enid Blyton. If Bylton ignores people of colour, that was because she was writing before the huge influx from the colonies flooded into England. 

The Royal Mint must honour Enid Blyton. Wokedom and its ideology cannot dictate the definition of culture and taste. Afterall Shakespeare and Charles Dickens can be read critically and wokedom can find serious thought crimes committed by these writers.