Chinese must junk misconceptions about Subhas Bose

Chinese must junk misconceptions about Subhas Bose

The lopsided view about Subhas Chandra Bose, taken by Indian historians and politicians alike, directly affected the Chinese notion about Bose.

Professor Priyadarsi Mukherji

The colonial era in India and the semi-colonial phase in China saw a series of cooperation and exchanges between the two peoples. The colonial domination by the British over India and China brought about misery and therefore prolonged struggle for freedom. However, certain misconceptions have been noticed, and to a great extent deliberated, so far as the Chinese interpretation of the Indian freedom struggle and some Indian political figures are concerned.

We all know that an Indian medical mission was sent to China in 1938. But the Chinese historians have chosen to emphasize that it was sent by Jawaharlal Nehru. Whereas, the person solely responsible for sending the mission along with an ambulance, after having collected a sum of Rs 22,000 on the All-Indian China Day and China Fund days on July 7-9, was none other than the President of the Indian National Congress -- Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. He had made an appeal to the people through a press statement on June 30, 1938. In Modern Review he wrote an article on Japan's role in the Far East and denounced her assault on China, "our whole heart going out to China in her hour of trial". Therefore, the Chinese assertion is wrong and biased.

Bose in his broadcast from Berlin on May 1, 1942 agued saying, "Those were the days when Marshal Chiang Kai-shek was fighting for his national principles and that was why he could win sympathy of Indians in an overwhelming degree. But the Marshal who came to India the other day to ask the Indian people to fight for England was quite a different man, a puppet of the Anglo-American forces.

One should notice that Bose while touring the Japanese-occupied South-East Asia in 1943, had been quite active in saving the lives of several ethnic Chinese from Japanese atrocities. Yet Marshal Chiang and later the communists branded Bose as a "traitor". Ironically in September 1931 when Chiang gave up the whole of north-east China to Japanese occupation, he was branded by the communists as a "big traitor" (maiguozei). Later his aligning with the Anglo-American forces brought him closer to his arch enemies, the communists, ofcourse, temporarily.

While professing national salvation and frequently visiting India for more funds, Chiang Kai-shek conveniently chose to ignore the cause of Indian freedom from the British yoke. The "egalitarian" worldview of the communists too failed to extend the logic of national liberation in the case of India. As Bose was vilified as "the running dog of Tojo" in his own motherland by the communists, on the other hand his goodwill for all freedom-loving people was conveniently disregarded by the Chinese historians in the name of his alliance wit the Japanese fascists without going into the truthful details.

Even our scholarly historians have been quite unfair and ruthless while dealing with Bose. They did not want to take cognizance of Netaji's serious differences with Hitler and later with the Japanese military authority. Netaji had a one-point programme in his life, the complete independence of India.

... In this world, either total and uncritical acceptance, or total repudiation especially in the political sphere is quite foolish and diehard position. That is exactly what has happened in the Chinese interpretation as well as some Indian outlook about Subhas Bose.

With Nehru at the helm of country, in post-independence India, brutally partitioned by power-hungry statesmen, Bose's name found no significant mention in the pages of modern history of India ... The lopsided view about Bose, taken by Indian historians and politicians alike, directly affected the Chinese notion about Bose. Thus, no genuine effort has been made, either by the Indian government, or by other states across the world, to unravel the mystery behind Bose's alleged disappearance. There is no doubt that the Chinese side too has been affected by such negative approach.

After 1949, despite Nehru's unconditional support to China, the latter hesitated the least to squarely accuse him for perpetrating the border crisis in 1962. His acceptance of Tibet as part of China became less significant for China compared to his sheltering the Dalai Lama. His alliance with the US during the days of Sino-Indian crisis, though viewed very critically, was considered necessary by China so as to counter Soviet Union in the late 1970s.

So, there has been no uniform parameter in China's policies or viewpoints except that with Subhas Bose. If the British intelligence officer Hugh Toye can change his views about Bose and become his admirer, then why can't China? A thorough retrospection as well as introspection are needed in this regard. An objectively realistic vision would help dispel these misconceptions. For that, of course, Bose has to be portrayed in the correct perspective firstly at home. And then we can expect others to follow suit.

There are indeed many aspects in this history of Sino-Indian contacts that remain shrouded in mystery or are simply unexplored. The reasons primarily being the inaccessibility of material, and due to certain erroneous policies of both Indian and Chinese governments so far as mutual perceptions are concerned. New horizons of knowledge and interactive relations must be explored so as to promote greater understanding between the two cultures. A concerted effort is needed to study the primary sources, to do field work, to make a knowledge bank by pooling talents, to translate large number of works and to disseminate and popularise those among general public.

Extracted from the paper India-China relations: A journey to the unexplored domains of history and culture published in the journal of the Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. Vol 2, Number 4 (October-December 2003).

Reproduced with the permission of the writer, a Professor in Chinese and Sinological Studies in Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delh