I don't need to give any introduction to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, at least in India almost everyone knows him. We studied his heroics in history books in our schools, and some of us also read about his tussle with Mahatma Gandhi when Bose became president of the Indian National Congress. He took a different path of armed freedom struggle when the rift between him and Gandhi widened because it was difficult for him to remain in Congress and pursue his agenda. Stories of his journey outside India and his struggle to obtain support from other countries for India's freedom struggle are very interesting and the story of his life is the subject of many books and some movies.
Many people think India would have performed better under his leadership instead of Nehru's or Gandhi's. They all also feel armed struggle (even if it didn't produce any desired results) was a better approach than Gandhi's nonviolent movement. Many of them ridicule Gandhi for his non-violent approach and think that he was weak and pro-Muslim compared to other leaders like Bose and Sardar Patel. All these assumptions are very biased, because Patel and Bose were leaders from the same political party (Indian National Congress) to which Gandhi belonged, and they always respected Gandhi. Patel was with Gandhi till Gandhi was murdered by a Hindu fanatic terrorist. Having a difference of opinion is not a bad thing at all, and both these leaders didn't criticize Gandhi or Congress in their lifetime but their supporters or people who want to use their name for political gains propagate these things about them.
I find Netaji's case unique because he was the only leader from India who tried to get military help from other countries to fight against the British. He traveled to countries like Germany and Japan (two very strong enemies of Britain during World War II) to get their direct or indirect military support. He even did not hesitate to ask for help from a leader like Hitler. I have no idea whether he knew at that time about Hitler's attitude towards Jews or not, but for him, Japan's aggressive attitude towards some countries in Asia or Hitler's attitude towards Jews was not a deterrent for asking for their help. I wonder whether Netaji Bose's supporters are fine with this aspect of his personality. I am asking this because many other leaders like Gandhi and Nehru are criticized for many things like their so-called pro-minority attitude, India's partition, or not saving a few freedom fighters from capital punishments, but I don't see any criticism directed towards Bose for asking help from these countries with very barbaric attitude towards their own people and neighbors during the World War II.
It seems Bose used very simple logic, the enemy's enemy is a friend. He never bothered what the enemy was doing or what were ethical and moral implications of taking help from countries with questionable human rights records. There is no doubt about his good intentions behind this, he was very passionate about winning freedom for his motherland, and it seems for him the end justified the means he wanted to use. Unfortunately, he died untimely death before one can see the final results of his efforts but I always feel curious about the scenario of what could have been the result if allied forces had demanded his trial after World War II because he sided with Hitler and others. How could have he defended himself? Actually, these all are hypothetical questions and it's very difficult to find answers, and answers will vary from person to person. These are the things that make me curious about Netaji Bose's life.
Many people think India would have performed better under his leadership instead of Nehru's or Gandhi's. They all also feel armed struggle (even if it didn't produce any desired results) was a better approach than Gandhi's nonviolent movement. Many of them ridicule Gandhi for his non-violent approach and think that he was weak and pro-Muslim compared to other leaders like Bose and Sardar Patel. All these assumptions are very biased, because Patel and Bose were leaders from the same political party (Indian National Congress) to which Gandhi belonged, and they always respected Gandhi. Patel was with Gandhi till Gandhi was murdered by a Hindu fanatic terrorist. Having a difference of opinion is not a bad thing at all, and both these leaders didn't criticize Gandhi or Congress in their lifetime but their supporters or people who want to use their name for political gains propagate these things about them.
I find Netaji's case unique because he was the only leader from India who tried to get military help from other countries to fight against the British. He traveled to countries like Germany and Japan (two very strong enemies of Britain during World War II) to get their direct or indirect military support. He even did not hesitate to ask for help from a leader like Hitler. I have no idea whether he knew at that time about Hitler's attitude towards Jews or not, but for him, Japan's aggressive attitude towards some countries in Asia or Hitler's attitude towards Jews was not a deterrent for asking for their help. I wonder whether Netaji Bose's supporters are fine with this aspect of his personality. I am asking this because many other leaders like Gandhi and Nehru are criticized for many things like their so-called pro-minority attitude, India's partition, or not saving a few freedom fighters from capital punishments, but I don't see any criticism directed towards Bose for asking help from these countries with very barbaric attitude towards their own people and neighbors during the World War II.
It seems Bose used very simple logic, the enemy's enemy is a friend. He never bothered what the enemy was doing or what were ethical and moral implications of taking help from countries with questionable human rights records. There is no doubt about his good intentions behind this, he was very passionate about winning freedom for his motherland, and it seems for him the end justified the means he wanted to use. Unfortunately, he died untimely death before one can see the final results of his efforts but I always feel curious about the scenario of what could have been the result if allied forces had demanded his trial after World War II because he sided with Hitler and others. How could have he defended himself? Actually, these all are hypothetical questions and it's very difficult to find answers, and answers will vary from person to person. These are the things that make me curious about Netaji Bose's life.
Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.
[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose
No comments:
Post a Comment