‘There has been a reawakening about Netaji and his role in India’s freedom’

“There is barely another example in the world where a national figure has been marginalized, his role reduced in the textbooks, and yet he continues to live in the public imagination for nearly eight decades after his disappearance. That he continues to command such admiration from a wide cross-section of society is perhaps a unique case.” Also listen: My Mother Suffered As She Had To Play Second Fiddle, Says Netaji’s DaughterThat is how researcher Chandrachur Ghose describes Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. Chandrachur has authored the book, Bose: The Untold Story of an Inconvenient Nationalist, and was pivotal in forming Mission Netaji, a pressure group that was the moving force behind the declassification of documents related to Bose. In 2016, Prime Minister Narendra Modi released digital copies of a hundred files that were linked to Netaji. A total of 300 files on Netaji have been declassified since…But has Netaji’s vision for a free India been realised, even partly? Is his brand of nationalism still relevant for a country due to celebrate its 74th Republic Day? On the 126th birth anniversary of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, we ask fresh questions about his life, his political loyalties and his still-unsung role in India’s freedom struggle. Inconvenient nationalist, loved by the masses, loathed by political forces Chandrachur calls Netaji an inconvenient nationalist in his book -- loved by the masses no doubt, but loathed in equal measure by the prevailing political forces of that time. Why was he inconvenient and, more importantly, who was he inconvenient for? Chandrachur says, “He was inconvenient for almost everybody because he was not a prisoner of any political ideology or any ‘ism’. All that mattered to him was India’s national interest, India’s freedom. And for that, he would take up any measure required. He was a man of his own conviction, own belief. This is something Pandit Nehru admitted to a foreign journalist towards the fag end of his life. In a rare moment of complete honesty, he had admitted, ‘Yes, I did let Subhash down because, for me, Gandhi was India and whatever I believe, although my beliefs were the same as Subhash, I could not side with him because I could not leave Gandhi.’ That explains the awkwardness of Gandhi and Congress towards Subhash Bose his being unable to accept them as well.” The Leftists, especially the Communist Party of India, were viciously against Subhash Chandra Bose and his role during the Second World War, his collaboration with the Axis Powers to drive out British imperialism. This was not just an ideological difference, the Leftists painted Netaji in a very negative light, calling him the running dog of Japanese imperialism, Tojo’s dog and other maligning names for which they had to apologize later on.Subhash Bose tried to build an alliance with the Hindu Mahasabha during the 1940 elections in the Calcutta Municipal Corporation, recalls Chandrachur, saying, “But that alliance broke down pretty quickly because of differences of opinion and differences in personalities. Thereafter, Subhash Bose entered into an alliance with the Muslim League, hoping to bring the progressive elements in the Muslim League towards his side, so that the conversation regarding the two-nation theory does not gravitate towards a more radical or fundamentalist direction. He was trying to create a broad-based platform at that time through his Forward Bloc. But that did not work because the Muslim League tried to manipulate him.” Even in present-day India, Netaji and his ideology have a sizeable lot of detractors. Chandrachur shares, “When Prime Minister Modi announced that Netaji’s statue would be set up near the India gate in that pedestal where King George’s statue used to be, a lot of Indian intellectuals were unhappy about it. So, that that criticism is still there. But the opposition is restricted mainly to certain Left oriented and Congress oriented intellectuals. At the mass politics level, there is absolutely no hesitation in accepting Netaji as a person who catalyzed India’s independence, who made the British Raj quit India in such haste.” How can a country give due to a leader who had very high ideals?Has India truly given Netaji his due? Or is he just etched in granite as a mere symbol of an ideal long forgotten in the pages of history? Netaji’s only daughter Anita Bose Pfaff says it’s a difficult question to answer.“To what extent can any country, any people faced with the ordinary problems of life, give due to a leader who had very high ideals? I think the most important thing, for me at least, is the fact that there are so many Indians who even remember him today. These are people who have never seen him personally or been exposed to his personality. But they still remember him in a very emotional way -- not in a remote and distant way as you remember a figure in history, but in a very personal way. They respect him, but they also love him very often. The fact that so many simple people do that is very gratifying. I think this is a repayment for what he has done for the country to some extent,” shares Anita. Did India’s governments always honour him? No, they didn’t, and Anita feels that was particularly tragic for the members of the Indian National Army that Netaji had formed, whose veterans had not been recognised as freedom fighters for many years. It was only in the Sixties or Seventies when they were finally recognised and given some benefits. Also, the fact that many people had lost their lives fighting for their country was sort of downplayed. “In the first years of independence, the narrative was that India became independent only because of civil disobedience, of which my father was, of course, also a participant. He certainly was not only a warrior. And then, after about 30 years, when the classified documents started to be declassified, it became quite evident that even though the Indian national army lost in military terms, the fact that there was an Indian national army, that there were Indians who were willing to sacrifice their lives for their country, was a great inspiration to Indian men and women. And when three officers of the INA -- a Hindu, a Muslim and a Sikh -- were put on trial, there was a resurgence of enthusiasm about the independence struggle. This ultimately led to the mutiny of armed forces, and that certainly was a very important factor for Britain to give up her hold on India,” stresses Anita.Netaji said Indian nationalism is neither narrow, nor selfish, nor aggressiveThat brings us to the most important question -- what is Netaji’s brand of nationalism, and is it still relevant in India today? For Chandrachur, it’s a resounding yes. He says, “In one of his speeches in 1928 to the Maharashtra Provincial Conference, when he was just 31 years old, Netaji drew upon his brand of nationalism. He said nationalism is sometimes criticized as narrow, selfish and aggressive. These are the same criticisms that are still levelled today. But he had countered this criticism, saying that Indian nationalism is neither narrow nor selfish, nor aggressive. It is inspired by the highest ideals of human race, that is Satyam, Shivam, Sundaram. Nationalism in India has instilled truthfulness, honesty, manliness, and the spirit of service and sacrifice. This was his brand of nationalism.” Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose’s vision for a free India was an all-inclusive secular India based on strong industrialization, based on science and technology, complete education, health facilities, reviving agriculture and so on. “In 1938, he was talking about agriculture in terms of critical issues in the sector like farmer indebtedness and productivity of crops, which are still being discussed today. The core of his nationalistic ideals and vision are still very much relevant in modern Indian political discourse,” insists Chandrachur. In fact, he says the “India First” slogan used by Narendra Modi even before he became prime minister actually has its origins in a slogan coined by Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose in 1939. Chandrachur shares that Netaji’s exact sentence was, “India must think of her interests first.”Netaji’s vision, if followed, would iron out many of India’s core issuesSo, how can India live up to Netaji’s vision? If he were here, Chandrachur says so many issues would have been ironed out. “He was the only politician who was not only talking theoretically about a unified country, but he actually demonstrated that it is possible to create a community where national interest takes precedence over religious beliefs. Netaji’s idea about a classless society where we would not have communal conflicts are issues that we are still trying to achieve. Had he been back in Indian politics, probably he would’ve been able to solve it in a more effective manner,” says Chandrachur. Issues like a good level of education -- without which India’s progress is unthinkable -- building a strong army to ensure her national security are very topical issues that we are still grappling with, he feels. These are still issues in the mainstream political discourse. “Unfortunately, because of the way he has been marginalized for the last 60, 70 years, we don’t get to hear his views as much as we get to hear the views of other politicians like Pandit Nehru or Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel or Babasaheb Ambedkar. Fortunately, there has been a reawakening about Netaji and his role in India’s freedom and his stature as a politician, as a statesman, as a visionary, as a thinker. And it’s a sign of hope that these questions are coming back, his views are slowly coming back into the mainstream political narrative. There are much more things to learn from his ideas, his thinking. There is much to be taken from his ideals, which are very, very relevant today and can shape the evolution of modern India,” Chandrachur signs off.Anchor: Surjan SinghAudio production: Sahil Gupta