Sir Sidney Wadsworth ICS A Life in History and Memory

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

A Judge in Madras: Sir Sidney Wadsworth and the Indian Civil Service, 1913 - 47.

Caroline Keen

New Delhi: Harper Collins, 2021.

Sir Sidney Wadsworth, ICS retired to the Isle of Man after he retired in 1947 and spent some of his retired life writing his "memoirs" which in the classic western sense was to remain a personal record of service, reflection and memory. However, his grandson, Simon Wadsworth took upon himself the task of rescuing the manuscript from the archives and getting Caroline Keen to flesh out the life and career of Sidney Wadsworth within the broader context of both Indian History and the administrative and judicial institutions of the Madras Presidency , where Wadsworth spent his entire official career. The result is a book rich in detail and is a significant addition to the growing literature of "Colonial Life and Careers". 

Before discussing the book we must address a particularly gross and intellectually vapid trend in "Imperial" and "Post Colonial" studies. White scholars seem to think that by aligning themselves with Black Lives Matter and ranting against the excesses of colonialism they rid themselves of both the guilt of their inherited past and the privileges which their colour has bestowed by virtue of colonialism, conquest and domination. Historical analysis based on empirical evidence rooted in a methodology that foregrounds reconstruction of the past is certainly more humane and enriching than the  ideological virtue signaling as represented by Priyamvada Gopal's Insurgent Empire.

The book under review fortunately avoids this trap of sliding into the quagmire of post colonial "discourse" by remaining focused on the life and the times in which Wadsworth lived. It makes no attempt at providing a Balance Sheet for the British Empire nor does it meander into the dead dreary sand of the "Idea of India" exposition so beloved of later day imperialists. It is perhaps a given that a young man in the late nineteenth century sent to the Colonies as a covenanted officer of the Crown would carry a sense of awareness of the immense power he wielded and towards the end of his life become a tad bit embarrassed over it as he approached the twilight of his life. And this indeed was the case with Sidney Wadsworth. "He was conscious of his own importance; but that very consciousness, while it may have given rise to a certain superiority of manner, also led him to put his work first and make it the paramount interest in life" (240). 

Sidney Wadsworth was born in 1888 and died in 1976, a life long enough to see the High Noon of Empire and the fading twilight into which Britain had descended by the early 1970s. He was educated in Sorbonne, Paris and he qualified for appointment to the Indian Civil Service in 1912 and was assigned to work in the Madras Presidency.  This Presidency for some reason was considered less desirable than the other two Presidencies and the sprawling provisions and commissionaires of British India. Having learnt Tamil he arrived in Madras just before the outbreak of World War I in 1913. Wadsworth's first posting was as sub collector of Vellore where he was trained by Sir Norman Majoribanks, the Collector. As the designation implies the first responsibility of the "Collector" was revenue assessment and collection, the Jamabandhi as it was termed in English revenue parlance. World War I saw him work as an army censor and later he was the sub collector of Gudur in Nellore District. Fort Galeria built near Lake Pulicat by the VOC, the Dutch East India Company was not merely a trading post for innocent trade goods like Textiles and Rice but was also a notorious Slaving Port on the Coromandel Coast. The Dutch raided the coastal areas fr slaves whom they sent to Batavia. It is unfortunate that Caroline Keen, a trained Historian, has missed this vital fact.

After the war ended, Wadsworth was posted to the Board of Revenue. But soon he decided that he would like to serve on the Judiciary and went to London for six months in order to qualify for judicial appointment. He was admitted to the Middle Temple, the same one that Gandhi, the self styled "father of the Nation" had entered. Presiding over murder trials involving local women and medically challenged accused must have been quite instructive. As the district judge of Chingleput, Wadsworth has perforce to adjudicate disputes over water and water rights as the area was essentially irrigated by rain fed water stored in tanks and reservoirs. He succeeded in settling a serious dispute over the sharing of the Swarnamuki river waters by making the litigants agree to arbitration rather than judicial judgement and it is said that his decision is still in force in the region. After a stint  in Madura, Sidney Wadsworth was posted to Madurai and later became a Judge in the High Court of Madras. 

 As the High Court Justice he presided over the Sir Raja Annamali Chettiyar Case and several important cases. In 1947 he retired just after India became "Independent" and after the Partition of the country. 

This biography based on the personal memoirs of an ICS Officer in Madras during the years of British rule is an interesting book and an important one in that it provides us insight into the mind of an officer during the heyday of Empire.

The Great Game all Over Again: Durand Line and India's Diplomacy

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

The disgraceful exit of USA from its 20 year involvement in Afghanistan, has presented India with an unenviable plight. Having backed the Northern Alliance and having spent 3 billion US dollars in various social and economic projects for the improvement of the Afghan people, India stares at two distinct  possibilities. First, the possibility of increased militancy in Kashmir is something that the Indian Security Establishment will have to consider. Second, the rise of Taliban as the ruling political hegemon in Afghanistan raises the possibility of a revival of the internal strife, the Stasis, as Thucydides termed it. Given the complex ethnic mosaic of Afghanistan the civil war may lead to certain unforeseen outcomes. The disintegration of Afghanistan as a Nation State with the Tajik and Uzbeg territories joining their ethnic cohorts across the border. More likely the Durand Line will once more become the bone of contention between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the state of Afghanistan.

Sir Mortimer Durand 

Lord George Curzon who had a deep and profound insight into the strategic requirements of the Indian frontier maintained that the Durand Line came close to being a "scientific frontier" for the Indian Empire. The Treaty of Gandamak, 1879 had established British control over the hyber Pass and the Amir of Afghanistan surrendered the right to conduct an independent foreign policy making the kingdom a satellite in the orbit of the British Indian Empire. As can be imagined this Treaty was highly umpopular with the Aghans and Sir Louis Cavagnari who was appointed Minister was assassinated in Kabul by an exited mob.

The response of the British was swift and ruthless. Three Armies were fielded against Afghanistan. General Roberts was to lead a force to Kabul, General Stewart was to occupy Kandahar and General Bright was to march to Jalalabad.  The forces of Amir Abdul Rehman were defeated and Afghanistan was forced to accept British demands and make territorial concessions. 

In November 1893 the Amir appended his signature to a one page document in English and he did not sign the accompanying map. Sir Mortimer Durand and his compatriot Sir Salter Sykes had succeeded in making the Amir sign away more than half the Pashtun territories of his Kingdom. Chitral, Bajour, Swat and Waziristan were essentially annexed and became the North West Frontier Province and till this day form part of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Kafiristan, an indigenous non Islamic territory was handed over to the Amir as concession and he promptly set about Islamizing the area. 

The Duran Line introduced a highly volatile element in the relationship between Afghanistan and the British Empire in India and after the War in 1919 Afghanistan was forced to accept the Durand Line as the border. The present Taliban rulers of Afghanistan have already said that they do not accept the Durand Line a nd have laid claim to the entire Pashtun speaking areas of Pakistan and this would also include Peshawar. The establishment of a unified Pashtun Homeland by combining the territories on both sides of the Durand Line is a possibility that India may have to confront. Iran has already stated that they do not recognize the Taliban and have asked it to gain democratic legitimacy. Herat, Kandahar, Mazar i Sharif and Kabul have all been part of Safavid territories before Ahmed Shah Abdali seized these cities. It is quite likely that Iran may seek to gain territory at the expense of a faltering and failing Afghan state.

India has to deal with this situation.  What will India do? It is time to enter the Great Game and the stakes are high. If played well India can achieve its long cherished goal of reclaiming the parts of Kashmir that are now occupied by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. And of of course Gilgit and Baltistan can also be regained. There are opportunities for India if the game is played well And dangers if  India does not seize the opportunities.

  

Woke,Inc : Inside America's Social Justice Scam A Review of Vivek Ramaswamy's expose

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

Woke,Inc Inside Corporate America's Social Justice Scam

Vivek Ramaswamy

Center Street, 2021

In Biden's and Kamala's America public discourse is around three ideological tenets: Systemic Racism, White Privilege and Equity. Together they constitute the foundations of Wokeism, a new political and cultural movement based on Identity Politics of Race Gender and Sexual Orientation. Vivek Ramaswamy has studied the ramifications of these ideological shibboleths  both in the larger context of American public life and the institutional carapace within which these ideologies are impacting both policies and culture. 

Vive Ramaswamy, is the son of Indian immigrants from South India and grew up in Ohio. He graduated from Harvard and went on to earn a JD from Yale University. He founded a Biotech Company, Roivant which raised venture capital funds of nearly a billion US dollars and remained a highly profitable venture. He was chose  to resign following the pronounced drift to Woke culture within the American Corporate World.

The book is a scathing indictment of Corporate America at least in its Woke avatar. This ideology argues Vivek is pernicious in that it robs the citizens not only of their money and wealth but their voice in the Public Square and their identity as well. The huge and unaccountable power in the hands of Corporate Mughals like Jack Dorsey of Twitter, Jeff Bezos of Amazon and Mark Zuckerberg of FaceBook has led to distortions in the information available to the citizens for making informed political judgement. The manner in which all these three Mega Tech Companies censored dissenting views on the Origin of COVID 19 and blindsided any discussion on the possible origins of the Virus in the Wuhan Virology Lab suggests a degree of coordination in pushing forth a scripted line. And Vivek rightly compares this with the Soviet style censorship of the 1930s. The de-platforming of President Trump by Twitter constitutes a violation of fundamental rights of a citizen to express himself. The flip side of this is that if the State or the agencies of the State acted in such a dictatorial or high handed manner the Judiciary would have intervened. But these Mega Tech Companies are private  players protected by an Act of Congress that limit their liability. He, unlike other critics who want to use the Anti Trust Laws to break up and discipline these entities, suggests that it is better to make Corporate America aware of its obligations to its shareholders leaving stakeholder concerns to the politicians

Vivek Ramaswamy is a crusader and like every crusader is armed with moral indignation which bristles on every page. The very companies that promote Black Live Matter and its agenda in USA are often extremely callous in other parts of the world. Nike which retained Kaepernick as its "brand ambassador" was hailed as a hero for kneeling when the US National Anthem was played and the Company gave a large donation to the Black Lives Matter Inc. However the fact that Nike shoes are made by Uygar slave labour in Communist China is of little moment for the awakened "woe" souls of the liberal world. Self interest passes off as morality in the Brave New World of Wokedom. Jeff Bezos who had several minority employees fired for speaking about the terrible working conditions in Amazon facilities, gave a donation of 10 Million US dollars to the Black Lives Matter and ensured that there is no adverse reaction. There is obviously a disconnect between the professed objectives of Social Justice and the actual practices of the Corporates. The fixation with BLM seems to be so overwhelming that outward expressions of fealty covers up great malfeasance. Volkswagen  which was hailed as a game changer in conforming to the demands of rigorous environmental norms was exposed as a cheat which beat the tests by installing a software that generated fake results. Such examples can be multiplied but the basic argument is that Wokeism is only an ideological cover for corporate greed and an alibi for gross violations of law, regulations and even Constitutional mandates. The example of Unilever is most instructive. The UN has several times commended the organization for "fempowering" women, Unilever speak for Female Empowerment. Women working in a Tea estate in Kenya were attacked and several of them assaulted and around 11 of them even killed. Unilever which was hailed as a great liberal upholder of Women's Rights did not pay any compensation and when the affected party appealed to the UN, strategic  contributions to NGOs  ensured  suppression and soon the matter was forgotten. Vivek rightly says, the "cloak of wokeness hides wrongdoing". 

Woke Corporate America's sins seem to be many. Airbnb shared personal data with the Communist Party of China a major player in the woke world. McKinsey, an Accounting Firm, prepared a Report for the Saudi Government in which it identified 3 major critics of the regime who posted o Twitter. The result they were arrested. Authoritarian regimes like those of China and Saudi Arabia seem to have close ties with Corporates subscribing to Woke ideology.  And China as a consummate player in this game has learnt to co opt woke methods to serve its own ends. The reason for this support is not hard to find: the immense wealth of China makes it inviting and New York Times and Washington Post carry full page advertisements issued by China and this is one way of funneling money into the American Ideological Apparatus. 

Interspersed in the book are interesting insights into the evolution of corporate structures in USA. Corporations enjoyed the benefits of limited liability in return for a Social Contract based on maximizing profits to the shareholder and serving the Nation's needs. Over the years Corporates have been able to expand their footprint in USA by claiming to represent the stakeholders, a catchall phrase for citizens, professional groups, church goers etc. By claiming to represent stakeholders  corporate USA has moved to the dangerous territory in which it is virtually accountable to no one.

Vivek Ramaswamy has stated clearly and argued that unless USA wakes up, democratic space and freedom in USA will be eroded.

Netaji Bose Papers: The Legal issues and the Nehruvian Regime's Prevarications

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

Bose inspecting troops 

The declassified records of the Home Ministry, External Affairs Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office make sordid reading. Nehru and his dynastic successors were mortally afraid of Subash Chandra Bose and his legacy as he had the potential of absolutely destabilizing the Congress Regime had he perchance survived the Air Crash and returned to India. It would not be wrong to say that the Congress Government under Nehru and his successors were invested in the Air Crash Theory not just as a hope but as an insurance against the challenge from Netaji. This is made clear from the questions and controversies surrounding Netaji in the months following the defeat of Japan in August 1945. 

In the immediate aftermath of the collapse of Japan in August 1945 Lord Wavell the Viceroy sought to have Netaji Bose declared or at least considered for prosecution for alleged "war crimes". It is not clear from the available records if the UN War Crimes Commission that was constituted by the victorious Allies considered the prosecution of Netaji. What is shocking, however, is the absolute nonchalance with which the possibility was treated by Nehru and his Government.  There is no evidence on hand to suggest that Nehru either protested such a characterization nor did he try to put the facts in a clear and unambiguous manner. Even during the Red Fort Trial the allegations around Netaji were not addressed. There is no doubt that the Imperial Japanese Army did commit war crimes against Indian citizens in Andamans, Singapore and Malaya. However, in the case of Andaman Islands even the British realised that Bose was only "nominally" in charge of the Islands.

The closest parallel we can make with another contemporary personality is Charles de Gaulle. Like de Gaulle, Bose escaped from his country during war time and sought the assistance of states which were opposed to the Government that existed in France. The only difference is that de Gaulle chose the side that emerged victorious and Netaji Bose ended up on the losing side. Charles de Gaulle was able to discredit Pierre Laval to such an extent that not only was the French Premier executed as a "war criminal" after a flawed trial, but also was able to get all the advantages of a victor, though France was a defeated, collaborationist state. 

The Secretary of State for India and the Colonies was reluctant to accept the reports of Bose's death in the crash of 18th August 1945 and this reluctance was taken as grounds to challenge the findings of both the Shah Nawaz Commission and the Justice Khosala Commission. And to the Nehruvian regime this was god sent. Any issue or question regarding Netaji Bose could be avoided or better still horribly confused by stirring it in the pot of the Air Crash theory. And later the repatriation of ashes back to India issue. And there was a constituency which played to the gallery and the charade continues thereby important questions about Netaji and his legacy are evaded.

R F Mudie in his letter to the Viceroy makes it clear that Bose cannot be treated as a  "war criminal" and he does not come within the "extended definition" which came into vogue and adopted by the United Nations. This letter is found in the Transfer of Power Documents and a photocopy is also found in the Netaji Papers. When it is so clear to a British Officer why was Nehru so reluctant to come clean on this issue.

During the course of the INA Trials at the Red Fort Delhi several facts were adduced regarding the torture and beatings to which Indian troops who were reluctant to join the INA were subjected to. And there is evidence to show such instances were not frequent. The INA was not complicit in any of the major war crimes committed by the Japanese forces in China and Southeast Asia. Joyce Lebra is clear on this. 

The controversy over the "war criminal" charge was allowed to fester only because it served the interests of the Nehru establishment and the Congress friendly regime sponsored "historians' lie Bipan Chandra and others have chosen to play along.

Netaji Bose Papers: The Controversy over the "Bharat Ratna"

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

The decision of the Government of India headed by Hon ble Prime Minister Narendra Modi to throw open the records of the Government of India relating to Subash Chandra Bose has evoked considerable interest. The records clearly show that at every step of the way Nehru strove hard to undermine the contributions of Bose and later appropriated them as part of the Congress legacy by inducing prominent lieutenants of the Netaji like Shah Nawaz Khan and Mohan Singh to defect to the Congress. Shah Nawaz rose to be a Minister in the Union Cabinet and presided over the first major Enquiry over the alleged death and disappearance of the great Patriot. 

Throughout the 17 years of Nehru's and the years of his daughter and grandson the Dynasty did not allow the contribution of Netaji to the Freedom Struggle to occupy its rightful place and after the Left took charge of the Ministry of Education after the split in the Congress in 1969, which saw Syed Nurul Hassan being crowned as the Czar of Higher Education, Netaji's stature in Indian History was deliberately slighted. One has only to read the badly crafted sentences in Bipan Chandra's Struggle for Freedom to realize the pathetic depths to which the leftist historians would go to diminish the stature of this towering figure. Throughout those long years Professor Samar Gupta kept raising questions about the disappearance of Netaji but little was done about honouring his memory. It was left to Hon ble Narendra Modi to build a suitable Museum to house the relics of the Indian National Army in New Delhi.

Why was the Nehruvian State hostile to Netaji? This questions goes right to the elephant lurking in the room. How did India get its Freedom. Dynasty friendly historians have chosen to silence the contribution of the INA and treat it as a mere embarrassing interlude in a Glorious Chapter headed by the great Troika--Gandhi, Nehru and Patel. Savarkar was brushed aside as the man who wrote "mercy petitions" thereby undermining his many years of sacrifice and suffering. Bose was made to "disappear" literally and metaphorically and so his legacy remained alien to Indian political life. The Forward Bloc founded by Bose tried to carry the torch but after the advent of the Communist Party of India, the Marxist Faction to prominence under Jyoti Basu swerved leftward leaving Bose behind. 

In 1991 when P V Narashima Rao was the Prime Minister and was running a minority Government with a deft combination of inducement (bribes JMM Bribery Case) and state coercion (the Jain Diary Case), a decision was made to award the Bharat Ratna to Subash Chandra Bose. He was tagged with Abdul Kalam Azad whose standing in India was certainly not of the same stature as Netaji Bose. A shrewd political gambit to link Bose with Azad hoping that it could be sold as "secular" recognition of two outstanding individuals. 

On October 10 1991 the Prime Minister wrote to R Venkataraman, the then President requesting the investiture of the Bharat Ratna on the two individuals, Bose and Azad, in recognition for "public service of the highest order" and "outstanding contribution to the freedom struggle". As far as the dynasty friendly historians were concerned, Bose ceased to struggle for Freedom once he was expelled from the Congress and as I have shown earlier the INA was reduced to an embarrassing footnote. So what exactly was being honoured in 1991--the Bose of the Congress Days or the great Netaji of the INA. 

On 3th February 1992, A K Narayanan, Joint Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs wrote to K N Bakshi the Indian Ambassador to Austria to contact Mrs Emilie Schenkl the widow of Netaji and Dr Mrs Anita Pfaff the daughter of the Great Patriot. On Feb 21 1992 Dr Anita Pfaff wrote to the Ambassador:

           "We are aware, however, the fact that in the past Netaji's achievements and contributions have not been recognized, particularly when it could be avoided comfortably". She went on to say that "Such an honour would have been appropriate in the 1950s."

A stinging rebuke from the daughter of the Patriot. And she went on to say "Whether his achievements were so minor that he had to stand in line for so long or so great that they would be remembered even after such a long time". Obviously the Bharat Ratna to Subash Bose who is a legend in India puts him at par with Nehru, Indira Gandhi Rajiv Gandhi and scores more and hence no patriot of India will ever like to see the legend diminished in this way. She concluded by saying that "One cannot honour Netaji today by awarding the Bharat Ratna.

The Bose Family did not accept the award and the insignia and Sanad as per the procedure are now in the Ministry of Home Affais.

 stinging 

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.