By Abhijit Choudhury
In recent times I have been reading the editorials, articles/commentaries and letters in the edit page of The Shillong Times with keen interest. In the last few years a number of writers, especially from among the Khasi and Pnar commentators, are articulating bold views and ideas. Among them {Messrs) Toki Blah, Avner Pariat, Ms Jennifer Dkhar, Rev H H Mohrmen, Fabian Lyngdoh and a few others are worth mentioning. However, one has to concede that the present editor of this daily has been spearheading this movement through the last few decades, thereby encouraging the others, particularly from the younger generations to come forward to place their observations in the public domain. In fact, in my article on the contextual dimensions of the Sixth Schedule, published in Contemporary India (Journal Of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi), in 2002, I have had cited Kong Patricia (as I would like to address her!). Of course, one may not necessarily agree with their views. But that should not deter the readers from participating in the public discourses. I recall a participant at a national seminar on the status of women in Meghalaya, in Shillong (1989) observing that dissent was necessary for the progress of any society. One may add that without the elements of self-criticality a society/community is bound to be decadent! If the fourth estate has the sacred task to guide a given state and a larger society, then perhaps your daily is trying to do so.
That said however, I have also noted that some writers/commentators either give wrong or distorted views/information, which may misguide people. Some writers are not able to transcend the boundaries of ethnic and cultural loyalties. Coming to the context of misinformation, I refer to Rev. Albert Thyrniang’s article, ‘Shillong RSS linked to Nazism and Fascism’ (ST, Jan 29). I refer specifically to the writer’s comment on Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. Thyrniang writes, “Facing the wrath of the British, Bose took shelter in Germany and Japan”. He adds that Hitler and Bose were “mutual admirers”. Nothing can be further from the truth! While Nehru was a ‘Fabian’ socialist, Bose was an ardent admirer of the Soviet model of ‘Marxian’ socialism. Though Bose commended on the good works of the Nazi government in improving the quality of public life in Germany, prior to Hitler’s embarking upon ethnic cleansing and aggressive foreign policy, he did not accept it for the India of the future. It is clear from his talks, correspondences and writings. More than the “British” wrath, Bose had to face morbid hostility from within the Indian National Congress led by M K Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru, Ballavbhai Patel, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and others. In spite of winning majority support for his presidential election at Tripura in 1939, ultimately he had to resign due to non cooperation from the Gandhiite faction. Prior to leaving India, in 1940 he wrote an article in a Bengali daily that more than the British, he had to face the enemies within! It is an irony of history that M K Gandhi later admired Bose’s heroic efforts to free India from the colonial yoke. He told Sir Stafford Cripps, while the latter visited India with the Cabinet Mission in 1946, that Bose was the “Patriot of Patriots”. An enraged Cripps wondered how the votary of non-violence could praise Bose, who advocated violence!
It is true that Bose went to Germany first and then to Japan. But how many of us know that he made an attempt to solicit the support of the Soviet Union? When Stalin cold shouldered him (as he was then involved in the diplomacy of ‘real politick’ with Hitler), Bose tried his luck with Germany. As the President of the Congress in 1938 he realized the intricacies of international relations and exhorted the Party members to take the opportunity of the coming showdown in Europe, so that India might be liberated. In his book on the reasons for leaving India (Keno Desh Chherechhi, Why I have left the country), he pointed out that enemy’s enemy could be used to advance the cause of freedom struggle. Probably he understood the utility of real politik in this sense. The question is: Did Bose admire Hitler and vice versa? The answer is a clear ‘No’! While proceeding to Moscow in 1941, Bose expressed his disdain towards the Nazi creed for its racist ultra nationalism. Yet after the failure of his mission in Moscow, he had to move to Berlin via Italy.
It is relevant to note, in our context, that during his sojourn on exile in Europe during 1933-37, he issued statement to the German Press strongly condemning Hitler’s racist comments against India and Indians. He wrote to the German academic and scholar, Dr. Thierfelder that while trying to arouse sympathy and support for the Indian cause, he would never compromise on India’s honour! His articles and interviews published in the European Press as well as his correspondences with his German and other friends and his lectures (both in radio and other fora), during this period clearly reflect his attitude towards Nazism and Fascism. After Bose arrived in Germany in 1941, he had difficult relations with the German authorities but Hitler ultimately agreed to meet him after much persuasion from the German Foreign office and the architect of this meeting, Von Ribbentrop! Hitler did not give any assurance of support. Indeed Hitler’s address before the officers of the Indian Legion in 1943, mentioned by Thyrniang, was the result of their efforts, which did not carry any meaning for the Indians!
Interestingly, Bose was held in high esteem by German diplomats and officials of the Foreign Office and by academics for his candid approach. They included such persons as Paul Leverkuehn, Dr, Alexander Werth, W Harbich, J H Voigt, Dr A Seifriz etc. Among them Dr Werth was actually anti-Nazi. He even went to live in England. However, being unable to adjust there, he returned to Germany and worked with the Foreign Office under compelling circumstances. Most of them had written books and articles (in the German Press) in the post-war era, which inform us on what really happened behind the scenes. The diaries of Goebbels state that the German government kept Bose under watch and that his radio addresses from the Azad Hind Radio were tapped. Voigt wrote that Bose had a poor opinion about the Nazi creed and never supported Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union (1942). He also refused to commit the troops from his Indian Legion on the eastern front in spite of pressures from the German authorities. Before leaving for South East Asia by submarine, on his way to Japan, in 1943, Bose instructed his commanders not to give in to such pressures. Many soldiers of the Legion were killed by the German officers for refusing to cooperate. This was revealed by the noted German Indologist, Dr. D Weidermann at a press conference in Calcutta (I’m using the spelling then in vogue) in 1973. This is also corroborated by the well known Left Parliamentarian of India, Late Prof Hiren Mukherjee. Further, the Italian Fascist Dictator, Mussolini was initially reluctant to assure any support to the Indian cause. However, after his meeting with Bose in May, 1942, he changed his stand and extended support for India’s liberation. Goebbels’ diaries reveal his annoyance over this development. Because, like Hitler, Goebbels believed that the British rule was beneficial for the inferior people of India!
Bose also did not get whole hearted support from the Japanese authorities as he was uncompromising on the independent status of the Government of Free India in exile. Although he commanded high respect from the Japanese, there were tensions between him and the Japanese commanders in South East Asia like Field Marshal Count Terauchi, General Isoda and Colonel Tada. The reasons include his refusal to allow them use the INA against the Burmese liberation fighters (against the Japanese) and against the Communist guerillas in Malaya in early 1945.
We will do well to remember that Bose does not belong to any one political party or group. Nor can any organization indulging in politics of culture claim him. He belongs to the people of India. He always thought of the liberation of India and a bright future for her. It is for this reason that his charisma appealed to all, cutting across caste, creed and community. It was reflected in the composition of the INA. Why did a number of tribals and non-tribals alike, from North East India, join the INA? Why did the NRIs of S. E. Asia donate their wealth to the Azad Hind Government? Definitely they realized the significance of this movement. Unfortunately, in India of the post-‘Transfer of Power’ era, we needed a ‘Hero’, to fall back on! Earlier Bose was disowned by the very Congress, some of whose leaders claim him now. So too the Indian Left, which once called him a “Quisling”, following the dictates of the so-called “People’s War.” They took a long time to admit that it was a “mistake”. Unlike the Nazis and the Fascists, Bose never believed in “Leadership Principle”, which he declared to have never been the creed of the Congress. Yet in India today personality cults are dominating our political culture. Hence we have a tendency to capitalize on the names of Bose, Gandhi or a Sardar Patel and even Nehru- Indira Gandhi.
This explains why sundry parties/groups are in search of ‘Heroes’ under political compulsions. This is an curious phenomenon! Before ending this apparent polemic, let me place my humble request to the writers/commentators like Rev Thyrniang to verify their facts before putting them in the public space. Because their role is to educate the society!