I’m doing a few talks this summer on the subject of my new book A War of Empires. I do hope you’ve heard of it! One of the questions I’m regularly asked is ‘why did Indians fight?’ In fact, I don’t spend much time talking about the subject in the book: a really good analysis is in Professor Srinath Raghavan’s book on the Indian Army
Even before I read your book I believed that India fought the Japanese because they knew that it would be easier to tell the Brits to leave than the Japanese. And as you note they knew occupation by the Japanese would be catastrophic. We knew the jig was up and so did the Indians, it was just a matter of time, time taken to defeat the Japanese. There’s a terrific line in your book (Pg500 HB) which thinks sums it up. “Thanks, I’ve got it. India’s our now. We’ll take over all tasks soon. What about a beer?” said the Indian Army to the Brits.
I think the capabilities and determination of the Indian Army and Airforce were dismissed by the Japanese, Italians, Germans and for that matter one or two ill-informed senior officers in the U.K. war department. Though it must be said not by Slim and his commanders.
Jun 30, 2022·edited Jun 30, 2022Liked by Dr Robert Lyman
A most interesting article. I had the opportunity to discuss why so many Indians joined the Indian army during the Second World War with several British Officers of the old Indian army as well as Indian World War 2 veterans. With the exception of the regulars, those who joined during the war did so for economic reasons rather than out of loyalty to the Raj or sovereign. I recall all the Indian veterans I interviewed stating they looked foward to India becoming independent.
Excellent Robert, as ever. Excellent too in that it gives us a more contextual understanding of the past whilst calmly countering the growing Indian anti-western groundswell of opinion that is being driven by Russian info ops.
Interesting article which challenges a modern myth. It would have been interesting to have some more examples of the thinking of individual Indians when they made the decision to join up.
Even less well known than the contribution of Indian troops in the Burma Campaign ( a significant part of which was fought in India!) is the contribution of Indian troops in the Middle East and Italian campaigns. However there was no direct interest for them in those campaigns as the threat of a Japanese invasion presented. How does that play into the debate?
When even the IWM release a vid onto their awful Youtube channel saying that Indians were 'forced to fight against their will' then you know that the new narratives have gone way overboard so thanks for trying to correct them.
I particularly agree with your points about denying Indian soldiers their agency. The 'naïve victims who were compelled to fight' narrative is patronising in the extreme. They were more than aware of the consequences of world events, and more than capable of reaching their own conclusions about joining up in their own interests.
It seems to me that they have become a pawn in modern political games - which is disrespectful to their memory to say the least.
Whilst in Imphal in March this year, it was put to me that the Manipurans were coerced into enlisting. After all the guy insisted, Manipur was not at that time part of India but rather a Princely State. He was also suggesting that both UK & Japan should fund a mission to search out and destroy the many items of ordnance still causing injury. Sadly I didn't at that time know enough to have a come back for him except to say that it was very much Manipur's fight also
Why did Indians join up to fight the Japanese?
Excellent piece, Robert. Always appreciate your insights.
Even before I read your book I believed that India fought the Japanese because they knew that it would be easier to tell the Brits to leave than the Japanese. And as you note they knew occupation by the Japanese would be catastrophic. We knew the jig was up and so did the Indians, it was just a matter of time, time taken to defeat the Japanese. There’s a terrific line in your book (Pg500 HB) which thinks sums it up. “Thanks, I’ve got it. India’s our now. We’ll take over all tasks soon. What about a beer?” said the Indian Army to the Brits.
I think the capabilities and determination of the Indian Army and Airforce were dismissed by the Japanese, Italians, Germans and for that matter one or two ill-informed senior officers in the U.K. war department. Though it must be said not by Slim and his commanders.
A most interesting article. I had the opportunity to discuss why so many Indians joined the Indian army during the Second World War with several British Officers of the old Indian army as well as Indian World War 2 veterans. With the exception of the regulars, those who joined during the war did so for economic reasons rather than out of loyalty to the Raj or sovereign. I recall all the Indian veterans I interviewed stating they looked foward to India becoming independent.
Excellent Robert, as ever. Excellent too in that it gives us a more contextual understanding of the past whilst calmly countering the growing Indian anti-western groundswell of opinion that is being driven by Russian info ops.
Interesting article which challenges a modern myth. It would have been interesting to have some more examples of the thinking of individual Indians when they made the decision to join up.
Even less well known than the contribution of Indian troops in the Burma Campaign ( a significant part of which was fought in India!) is the contribution of Indian troops in the Middle East and Italian campaigns. However there was no direct interest for them in those campaigns as the threat of a Japanese invasion presented. How does that play into the debate?
When even the IWM release a vid onto their awful Youtube channel saying that Indians were 'forced to fight against their will' then you know that the new narratives have gone way overboard so thanks for trying to correct them.
I particularly agree with your points about denying Indian soldiers their agency. The 'naïve victims who were compelled to fight' narrative is patronising in the extreme. They were more than aware of the consequences of world events, and more than capable of reaching their own conclusions about joining up in their own interests.
It seems to me that they have become a pawn in modern political games - which is disrespectful to their memory to say the least.
Whilst in Imphal in March this year, it was put to me that the Manipurans were coerced into enlisting. After all the guy insisted, Manipur was not at that time part of India but rather a Princely State. He was also suggesting that both UK & Japan should fund a mission to search out and destroy the many items of ordnance still causing injury. Sadly I didn't at that time know enough to have a come back for him except to say that it was very much Manipur's fight also