Controversies surrounding the Indian National Army

Last updated

The integral associations of the Indian National Army's history with that of the war in South East Asia, especially the Japanese occupation of South East Asian countries, the renunciations of the oath to the King, as well as British war-time propaganda and later allegations of torture by INA soldiers have inspired a number of controversies. Principal among these is British intelligence propaganda [1] [2] [3] during the war which alleged torture at a massive scale of British Indian Army and Allied prisoners of war by the INA troops in collaboration with the Japanese. [1]

Contents

A strongly opposed view has emerged after the war, especially within India, based on the motivations of the troops who formed the INA, where a predominant view was held, and still holds, of the INA as patriots and revolutionaries. Outside India it is not widely known, and the accounts and views on the INA, especially among the Allied servicemen who served in Burma, are diametrically opposite. [4] However, almost no account of the Indian independence movement ignores the INA.

Other controversies have risen on the contributions of the INA to India's independence, the treatment of INA troops in Independent India, as well as the conditions of expatriate Indians who joined the INA.

Axis collaboration

Breaking Oath

Different historians have cited other reasons for the INA's recruits volunteering to serve with the Japanese enemy. These included both the ideal of wanting to fight for India's independence, the inevitable desire not to be interned in the POW camp, as well as ambition. Some cite the destruction and devaluation of the Raj's prestige and authority in the Malayan debacle and the humiliating surrender at Singapore that first shook the Sepoys' loyalty to the Raj. In addition, a number of authors have cited the disparity in the service conditions (including scopes of progression in the army) and treatment of white and Indian troops within the army as another reason for ill-feelings within the Indian troops.

Further reason cited by Both Fay and Lebra and other authors indicate monetary and situational scopes, as well as the resentment at the abandonment of the Indian troops at Singapore by their White comrades and the officers. Controversy exists as to what was actually said by Col J.C. Hunt in the first of the three speeches during the surrender ceremony for the Indian troops at Farrer Park on 17 February 1942. Fay writes in 1993 that a number of the troops gathered at the park remembers Hunt as having told the troops that they now belonged to the Japanese army and should obey their orders while Hunt only remembers having said that they were all Prisoners of War of the Japanese [5] Nevertheless, Fay also points out that the fact that they were all POWs was already self-evident, and the fact that they were addressed separately implies some significance. A number of INA veterans present at the ceremony have said that, for the Indian troops, this also fed a feeling of devaluation (handed over like cattle, as Shah Nawaz Khan later put it), [6] abandonment and of dishonour on part of the British high command that they perceived to have served loyalty. [6]

In the days and years to come, a number of INA men cited this act of abandonment a major reason to join the first INA. [6] Others, especially the officer corps including the Indian Commissioned Officers (ICOs) and Viceroy's Commissioned Officers (VCOs) have said that they initially joined the first INA to prevent any possible ill-treatment of their subordinate Indian soldiers. When Singapore fell, eyewitness reports suggested "rows of Indian POWs were shot" by the Japanese. [7] However, all authors agree that Subhas Chandra Bose's charismatic leadership and persona was probably also amongst the most significant factors that drew the recruits of the second INA and was key in transforming it into a cohesive fighting force. A large number of Indian soldiers did not join the army and remained as PoWs. Many were sent to work in the Death Railway and suffered hardships under Japanese internment, and nearly eleven thousand died. [8] Many of these soldiers, cited the oath of alleigance they had taken to the King as a reason not to join a Japanese-supported organisation, and regarded the recruits of the INA as being traitors. Commanders in the British-Indian Army like Wavell later highlighted the hardships this group of soldiers suffered, contrasting them with the troops of the INA. [8]

Collaboration

During the war, the associations of the INA with the Japanese, and circulating stories of it being a small force of turncoats, of participations in outrages by Japanese forces and other stories meant that a number of Congress leaders viewed what it knew about the INA as a traitor army. In addition, a number of Congress Leaders, including Gandhi, announced the Japanese as unwelcome. Other political forces, including the Indian Communist Party and its members viewed the INA as fascist-collaborators, and was instrumental in helping the British Indian police and security forces track down INA agents landed in India by submarine or Parachute during the war. Amongst the allied troops who fought in South-east Asia the predominant opinion of the INA, especially in the accounts of the war in the popular accounts of British and Australian servicemen of the war in Burma, is of a contemptuous auxiliary force that was a totally ineffective fighting force and composed of cowards and brutes who sought opportunities to desert. [9]

The army intelligence service in India, when it became aware of the establishment and existence of the INA, was also faced with the possibilities of the sepoys of the Eastern Army (as the 14th Army was called then) deserting. It was also during this time that the intelligence started coming in possession of accounts of torture and ill-treatment meted out to Allied troops and PoWs by the Japanese forces in Burma. During the war, the psychological warfare section of the India Command under Lt Colonel Hunt, known as GSI(q), to propaganda against the INA. [2] [10] and British commander and officers of the 14th Army were instructed to allude to the existence of the INA to the frontline Indian troops. These were also to include references to the army as an auxiliary force to the Japanese forces, as well as that they were collaborators and traitors. [11] After the war, Allied PoWs, as well as Indian PoWs who did not join the INA, described bitter memories of labour camps and ill-treatment in the hands of Japanese forces. In addition, the war time intelligence work and propaganda had described the INA to the media, incorrectly, as a small force of deserters from among a large majority of Indian PoWs who remained loyal to the Raj and refused to join. In addition, the propaganda work also associated the INA with Japanese atrocities on allied PoWs and local populace. These allegations were not corrected or withdrawn at the end of the war. [11]

Allegations of torture

Allegations of torture by the INA were also made during the war. Fay, however, notes that these allegations were not borne out by the number of men charged with torture at the Red Fort trials, nor by the charges against them. In the first INA trials, Fay notes the three men were charged with Murder and abetment to murder of troops of the INA itself who had attempted to desert, and argues that this had been in an open process based on the INA's own laws, drawn from the Indian Army Act, 1911, noting the court found the three men not guilty. However, Fay also describes the some of later ones of the ten or so trials, most prominently that of Burhan-ud-Din of Chitral and others, where the allegations of torture in Fay's opinion were justified. Nevertheless, Fay argues that these made up a few instances and by no means match up to the large scale torture alleged and concludes these to be war-time intelligence manoeuvres of the Jiffs campaign.

Some have also made allegations of complicity in the Selarang Barracks Incident at Singapore in 1942, where INA guards are alleged to have shot four Australian PoWs who had attempted to escape from Changi Prison. [12]

Independent India

Indian independence

It has been argued by a number of historians, contemporary and modern, that the preparations for British withdrawal from India had already begun before World War II started, and the INA or the movements arising out of it achieved nothing. The pro-Bose camp has however argued that although the will to relinquish the Raj may have existed already, but the events of the Red Fort trials, the Bombay mutiny and destabilisation within the armed forces were a principal reason for the hasty end to the Raj even in the face of dismal political scene. The INA has also been criticized since a military success by the INA and its allies, would have probably led to bondage for India and the rest of South East Asia to Japan.

Within India, the story of the Army was seen at the time, and still seen, both as fascinating story as well as a turning-point in the movement for Independence. [13] After the ban on the INA was lifted on 10 May, it was seen as the first "national" force not decreed by caste and religion. [14] [15] [16] As Sumit Sarkar puts it, its biggest impact was on the patriotic imagination of an army fighting for the country's independence, led by a Bengalee- the least "Martial" of India's "races" in traditional British stereotype. [17] Reports and tales on the INA emerged in the national and vernacular press, after the ban on reporting the INA was lifted in April 1945, along with this the coverage of the Red Fort trials engendered much public agitations and support for the troops and quickly became a major driving force in the closing days of the Independence Movement. The INA's war cries of "Chalo Delhi" (on to Delhi) and most of all " Jai Hind " were among the slogans of independence movement, and of protesters demanding their release. [18]

INA in modern Indian history

A further controversy exists, especially within India, with regards to the attitude and treatment towards the INA by the post-1947 Governments of India as well as the omission of the events of September 1945-46 from the historical records of the independence movement. [19] [20]

Nehru, in 1948, refused to readmit the men of the INA to the Indian Army after independence. He cited the break in the service of the ex-INA men, as well as the effects on the Indian Army of taking ex-INA troops into their ranks. [14] However, it has been noted that as late as 1948, considerable pro-INA sentiments existed in the army as well as public psyche, attracting strong dissatisfactions from members of Nehru's cabinet. Defence Minister Sardar Baldev Singh is on record as having commented on the need to strengthen the morale of the Indian army [21]

which in recent months has been somewhat tried for internal discipline and perverse lauding of the "Indian National Army" and its role in the war against the Allies in Asia.

A history of the army and of Azad Hind, written by Indian historian Pratul Chandra Gupta in 1950s at the request of the Indian Government, was subsequently classified and not released until 2006.[ citation needed ]

Freedom fighters pension

Also, although Nehru promised pensions, the men of the INA were not eligible for the Freedom Fighters Pension till 1972. A number of people, notably ex-members of the INA and sympathetic groups have accused the Nehru, Mountbatten, and subsequently successive Congress governments, of largely ignoring and not-recognising the role of the INA, as well as the events surrounding it between 1945–46, in the history of the Independence movement. These have been compounded by a number of conspiracy-theories and news reports in the past on agreements between the Indian political leadership to hand over its leader Subhas Chandra Bose as a war criminal if he was found to be alive. [22] [23] [24] Later historians have, however, argued that given the political aim and nature of the entire Azad Hind movement especially the Indian National Army, Nehru's decisions may have been to prevent politicisation of the army and assert civilian authority over the military. [25]

Further criticisms have been made in recent years for the general hardships and apathy surrounding the conditions of ex-INA troops [26] including, for example, the circumstances surrounding the death and funeral of Ram Singh Thakur, the composer of Qadam Qadam Badhaye Ja. [20] [27]

Expatriate stateless veterans

Also, criticisms have been made for the lack of recognition afforded to the expatriate Indians, notably Burmese Indians, who joined the INA and were not repatriated to India at the end of the war. [24] Most are not recognised as Indian citizens, and not recognised as citizens in their adopted countries, effectively being stateless people.

Azad Hind treasures

Further controversy relates to the fate of the Azad Hind fortune. Bose is said to have been travelling with it during his last known journey. The treasure, a considerable amount of gold ornaments and gems, is said to have been recovered from Bose's belongings following the fatal plane crash in Formosa that reportedly killed him. [28] Despite repeated warnings from Indian diplomats in Tokyo, Nehru is said to have disregarded allegations that men previously associated with Azad Hind misappropriated the funds for personal benefit. Some of these are said to have travelled to Japan repeatedly with the approval of Nehru government and were later given government roles implementing Nehru's political and economic agenda. [28] A very small portion of the alleged treasure was repatriated to India in 1950s. [28]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian National Army</span> Army of mostly Indian POWs of Japan in WW2

The Indian National Army was a collaborationist armed unit of Indian collaborators that fought under the command of the Japanese Empire. It was founded on 1 September 1942 in Southeast Asia during World War II.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Subhas Chandra Bose</span> Indian nationalist leader and politician (1897–1945)

Subhas Chandra Bose was an Indian nationalist whose defiance of British authority in India made him a hero among many Indians, but his wartime alliances with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan left a legacy vexed by authoritarianism, anti-Semitism, and military failure. The honorific Netaji was first applied to Bose in Germany in early 1942—by the Indian soldiers of the Indische Legion and by the German and Indian officials in the Special Bureau for India in Berlin. It is now used throughout India.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">India in World War II</span> Involvement of India in World War II

During the Second World War (1939–1945), India was a part of the British Empire. India officially declared war on Nazi Germany in September 1939. India, as a part of the Allied Nations, sent over two and a half million soldiers to fight under British command against the Axis powers. India also provided the base for American operations in support of China in the China Burma India Theater.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Azad Hind</span> Indian provisional government in Japanese-occupied Singapore during World War II

The Provisional Government of Free India or, more simply, Azad Hind, was a short-lived Japanese-supported provisional government in India. It was established in Japanese occupied Singapore during World War II in October 1943 and has been considered a puppet state of Empire of Japan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Legion</span> Indian volunteer unit in Nazi Germany

The Indian Legion, officially the Free India Legion or 950th (Indian) Infantry Regiment, was a military unit raised during the Second World War initially as part of the German Army and later the Waffen-SS from August 1944. Intended to serve as a liberation force for British-ruled India, it was made up of Indian prisoners of war and expatriates in Europe. Due to its origins in the Indian independence movement, it was known also as the "Tiger Legion", and the "Azad Hind Fauj". As part of the Waffen-SS it was known as the Indian Volunteer Legion of the Waffen-SS.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mohan Singh (general)</span>

Mohan Singh was an Indian military officer, Japanese collaborator and member of the Indian Independence Movement best known for organising and leading the Indian National Army in South East Asia during World War II. Following Indian independence, Mohan Singh later served in public life as a Member of Parliament in the Rajya Sabha of the Indian Parliament. He was a member of the Indian National Army (INA).

The Indian Independence League was a political organisation operated from the 1920s to the 1940s to organise those living outside India into seeking the removal of British colonial rule over India. Founded by Indian nationalists, its activities were conducted in various parts of Southeast Asia. It included Indian expatriates, and later, Indian nationalists in-exile under Japanese occupation following Japan's successful Malayan Campaign during the first part of the Second World War. During the Japanese Occupation of Malaya, the Japanese encouraged Indians in Malaya to join the League.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian National Army trials</span> British Indian trial by courts-martial

The Indian National Army trials was the British Indian trial by court-martial of a number of officers of the Indian National Army (INA) between November 1945 and May 1946, on various charges of treason, torture, murder and abetment to murder, during the Second World War. In total, approximately ten court-martials were held. The first of these was the joint court-martial of Colonel Prem Sahgal, Colonel Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon, and Major-General Shah Nawaz Khan. The three had been officers in the British Indian Army and were taken prisoner in Malaya, Singapore and Burma. They had, alongside a large number of other troops and officers of the British Indian Army, joined the Indian National Army and later fought in Burma alongside the Japanese military under the Azad Hind.

The Bidadari Resolutions were set of resolutions adopted by the nascent Indian National Army in April 1942 that declared the formation of the INA and its aim to launch an armed struggle for Indian independence. The resolution was declared at a prisoner-of-war camp at the Bidadari in Singapore during Japanese occupation of the island.

Major General Arcot Doraiswamy Loganadan was an officer of the Indian National Army, and a minister in the Azad Hind Government as a representative of the Indian National Army. He also served briefly as their Governor for the Andaman Islands and Burma.

Jiffs was a slang term used by British Intelligence, and later the 14th Army, to denote soldiers of the Indian National Army after the failed First Arakan offensive of 1943. The term is derived from the acronym JIFC, short for Japanese-Indian fifth column. It came to be employed in a propaganda offensive in June 1943 within the British Indian Army as a part of the efforts to preserve the loyalty of the Indian troops at Manipur after suffering desertion and losses at Burma during the First Arakan Offensive. After the end of the war, the term "HIFFs" was also used for repatriated troops of the Indian Legion awaiting trial.

The First Indian National Army was the Indian National Army as it existed between February and December 1942. It was formed with Japanese aid and support after the Fall of Singapore and consisted of approximately 12,000 of the 40,000 Indian prisoners of war who were captured either during the Malayan campaign or surrendered at Singapore and was led by Rash Behari Bose of Japan. It was formally proclaimed in April 1942 and declared the subordinate military wing of the Indian Independence League in June that year. The unit was dissolved in December 1942 after apprehensions of Japanese motives with regards to the INA led to disagreements and distrust between Mohan Singh and INA leadership on one hand, and the League's leadership, most notably Rash Behari Bose, who handed over the Indian National Army to Subhas Chandra Bose but remained as Supreme Advisor to INA. A large number of the INAs initial volunteers, however, later went on to join the INA in its second incarnation under Subhas Chandra Bose.

The Farrer Park address was an assembly of the surrendered Indian troops of the British Indian Army held at Farrer Park in Singapore on 17 February 1942, two days after the Fall of Singapore. The assembly was marked by a series of three addresses in which the British Malaya Command formally surrendered the Indian troops of the British Indian Army to Major Fujiwara Iwaichi representing the Japanese military authority, followed by transfer of authority by Fujiwara to the command of Mohan Singh, and a subsequent address by Mohan Singh to the gathered troops declaring the formation of the Indian National Army to fight the Raj, asking for volunteers to join the army.

The Battles and Operations involving the Indian National Army during World War II were all fought in the South-East Asian theatre. These range from the earliest deployments of the INA's preceding units in espionage during Malayan Campaign in 1942, through the more substantial commitments during the Japanese Ha Go and U Go offensives in the Upper Burma and Manipur region, to the defensive battles during the Allied Burma campaign. The INA's brother unit in Europe, the Indische Legion did not see any substantial deployment although some were engaged in Atlantic wall duties, special operations in Persia and Afghanistan, and later a small deployment in Italy. The INA was not considered a significant military threat. However, it was deemed a significant strategic threat especially to the Indian Army, with Wavell describing it as a target of prime importance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Subh Sukh Chain</span>

Subh Sukh Chain was the national anthem of the Provisional Government of Free India.

Habib ur Rahman (1913–1978) was an army officer in the Indian National Army (INA) who was charged with "waging war against His Majesty the King Emperor". He served as Subhas Chandra Bose's chief of staff in Singapore, and accompanied Bose on his alleged last fatal flight from Taipei to Tokyo, sharing the last moments of his life. Rahman also played an important role in the First Kashmir War. Convinced that Maharaja Hari Singh was out to exterminate the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir, he joined Major General Zaman Kiani, in launching a rebellion against the Maharaja from Gujrat in Pakistani Punjab. Rehman and his volunteer force launched an attack on the Bhimber town. But, the records of the 11th Cavalry of the Pakistan Army indicate that their efforts did not succeed, and eventually the Cavalry was responsible for conquering Bhimber.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Propaganda and India in World War II</span>

Throughout World War II, both the Axis and Allied sides used propaganda to sway the opinions of Indian civilians and troops, while at the same time Indian nationalists applied propaganda both within and outside India to promote the cause of Indian independence.

The Indian National Army (INA) and its leader Subhash Chandra Bose are popular and emotive topics within India. From the time it came into public perception in India around the time of the Red Fort Trials, it found its way into the works of military historians around the world. It has been the subject of a number of projects, of academic, historical and of popular nature. Some of these are critical of the army, some — especially of the ex-INA men — are biographical or autobiographical, while still others historical and political works, that tell the story of the INA. A large number of these provide analyses of Subhas Chandra Bose and his work with the INA.

The INA treasure controversy relates to alleged misappropriation by men of Azad Hind of the Azad Hind fortune recovered from belongings of Subhas Chandra Bose in his last known journey. The treasure, a considerable amount of gold ornaments and gems, is said to have been recovered from Bose's belongings following the fatal plane crash in Formosa that reportedly killed him, and taken to men of Azad Hind then living in Japan. The Indian government was made aware of a number of these individuals allegedly using part of the recovered treasure for personal use. However, despite repeated warnings from Indian diplomats in Tokyo, Nehru is said to have disregarded allegations that men previously associated with Azad Hind misappropriated the funds for personal benefit. Some of these are said to have travelled to Japan repeatedly with the approval of Nehru government and were later given government roles implementing Nehru's political and economic agenda. A very small portion of the alleged treasure was repatriated to India in the 1950s.

The Indian National Army (INA) was a Japanese sponsored Indian military wing in Southeast Asia during the World War II, particularly active in Singapore, that was officially formed in April 1942 and disbanded in August 1945. It was formed with the help of the Japanese forces and was made up of roughly about 45 000 Indian prisoner of war (POWs) of British Indian Army, who were captured after the fall of Singapore on 15 February 1942. It was initially formed by Rash Behari Bose who headed it till April 1942 before handing the lead of INA over to Subhas Chandra Bose in 1943.

References

  1. 1 2 Fay 1993 , pp. 423–424, 453
  2. 1 2 Aldrich 2000 , p. 163
  3. ↑ Fay 1993 , pp. 461–463
  4. ↑ William L Farrow. "Indian National Army (Japanese Independent Force)". BBC. Retrieved 8 July 2007.
  5. ↑ Green 1948 , p. 45,46
  6. 1 2 3 Fay 1993 , p. 83
  7. ↑ Singapore's Changi Museum records undeniable history
  8. 1 2 Menon 1997 , p. 225
  9. ↑ Fay 1993 , p. 290
  10. ↑ Aldrich 2000 , p. 159
  11. 1 2 Fay 1993 , p. 427
  12. ↑ Thompson 2005 , p. 389
  13. ↑ "INA war veterans get a warm welcome". The Times of India . 18 April 2004. Archived from the original on 21 October 2012. Retrieved 7 July 2007.
  14. 1 2 Allen 1971 , p. 91
  15. ↑ Fay 1993 , p. 450
  16. ↑ Ghosh 1969
  17. ↑ Sarkar 1983 , p. 411
  18. ↑ Fay 1993 , p. 485
  19. ↑ Cohen 1971 , p. 132
  20. 1 2 Shaikh, Sajid (6 October 2001). "INA's soldier lives in oblivion in Vadodara". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 18 October 2012. Retrieved 7 July 2007.
  21. ↑ Green 1948 , p. 68
  22. ↑ "Radhakrishnan met Netaji in Moscow, says witness". Hindustan Times . 17 November 1970. Archived from the original on 26 April 2005. Retrieved 2 September 2007.
  23. ↑ "Gandhi, others had agreed to hand over Netaji". Hindustan Times. 23 January 1971. Archived from the original on 21 February 2004. Retrieved 2 September 2007.
  24. 1 2 Shahira Naim. "The Bose I knew is a memory now - Lakshmi Sahgal". The Tribune. Retrieved 2 September 2007.
  25. ↑ Sumit Ganguly. "Explaining India's Transition to Democracy ". Columbia University Press. Retrieved 3 September 2007.
  26. ↑ Pratibha Chauhan. "INA hero gets shabby treatment". Tribune News Service. Retrieved 2 September 2007.
  27. ↑ "INA hero Ram Singh dead". The Times of India. 16 April 2002. Archived from the original on 21 October 2012. Retrieved 2 September 2007.
  28. 1 2 3 Kavitha Muralidharan. "Who shrunk Netaji's fortune?". India Today. Retrieved 19 September 2015.

Bibliography

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.