HISTORY OF INDIA VIII (c.

1857–1950)

Name: Yashasvi
Course: B.A. History (Hons.)
Roll No: 0622052

Subhas Chandra Bose and the INA

“Subhas Bose was a dynamo of nationalism, too fiery to be contained within party lines.
— Stephen P. Cohen

Some revolutions are whispered through petitions; others crash through history like a storm.
Subhas Chandra Bose belonged to the latter. In India’s long freedom struggle, often dominated by
Gandhi’s non-violence and Nehru’s constitutional politics, Bose stood apart—not opposing the
dream of freedom, but believing it must be fought for, not waited upon. The narrative of India's
independence is thus marked by figures challenging British rule through diverse means, and Bose
represents a radical alternative to the Gandhian tradition. His formation and leadership of the
Indian National Army (INA) signified a dramatic departure, offering what he saw as a pragmatic
path to liberation. This essay examines Bose's political evolution, his leadership of the INA, and
the complex legacy of his militant nationalism, situating his revolutionary activities within the
contexts shaping his vision for an independent India.

Bose’s journey from an elite academic to a fiery revolutionary is one of the most fascinating
chapters in modern Indian history. Born in 1897 into an upper-middle-class Bengali family, he
followed a conventional path—excelling at Presidency College in Calcutta, then at the University
of Cambridge, and finally qualifying for the prestigious Indian Civil Service. But that life wasn’t
meant for him. The call of India’s freedom movement was too strong. He resigned from the ICS
and plunged headlong into politics. As historian Shekhar Bandyopadhyay points out, Bose came
of age during a time of global upheaval: World War I, the Russian Revolution, and rising questions
about empire and imperialism. His political worldview was influenced by these developments, as
well as by ideologies sweeping across Europe—especially socialism and certain structural aspects
of fascism (though Bose firmly rejected its racism and authoritarianism). While Gandhi found
strength in moral and spiritual ideals rooted in Indian traditions, Bose looked outward, seeking
modern, international models of resistance. His rise within the Indian National Congress was swift.

By 1938, he was elected President of the party, winning despite Gandhi’s opposition—a clear sign
of how popular his ideas had become among younger nationalists. Yet, tensions between Bose and
the Gandhian camp soon became too deep to ignore. He wanted a more aggressive stance against
the British, especially as World War II broke out. When his ideas were rejected, Bose stepped
down and formed the Forward Bloc in 1939, signaling a clean break from Congress orthodoxy.

Things escalated in 1940 when Bose was arrested by British authorities. From house arrest, he
pulled off a daring escape—traveling via Afghanistan and the Soviet Union to Germany and
eventually reaching Japan. It was a bold move, reflecting not just his desperation, but also his
belief that India’s independence could be secured through international support and military
pressure. World War II created a strange opening. When Japan captured Singapore in 1942, nearly
40,000 Indian soldiers from the British Indian Army were taken as prisoners. Japan saw an
opportunity to weaponize anti-colonial sentiment, and so did Indian officers like Captain Mohan
Singh, who began organizing these POWs into what became the Indian National Army. But this
first version of the INA struggled—it lacked direction, and Singh clashed with Japanese officials
over their real intentions. Bose’s arrival in Southeast Asia in 1943 changed everything. Taking
command, he gave the INA political purpose, structure, and a unifying vision. He declared the
formation of the Azad Hind Fauj (Free India Army) and established a Provisional Government of
Free India (Arzi Hukumat-e-Azad Hind) from Singapore. According to Stephen P. Cohen, Bose
displayed impressive administrative skill in molding a demoralized group of prisoners into a
dedicated fighting force.

Bose’s INA was more than just a military outfit—it was a symbol of what independent India could
look like. “Jai Hind” became its rallying cry. One of his most revolutionary acts was creating the
Rani of Jhansi Regiment, a women's combat unit that directly challenged both colonial power and
patriarchal norms in Indian society. For a country still steeped in gender conservatism, this was a
bold move that captured national imagination.

Strategically, Bose believed the British Empire—already reeling under Nazi Germany’s assault—
couldn’t withstand a second front in Asia. With Japanese forces advancing through Southeast Asia,
he hoped the INA could help deliver a decisive blow. The 1944 Imphal-Kohima campaign was the
INA’s first major operation. While the campaign eventually failed—due to weather, supply issues,
and British reinforcements—INA soldiers did manage to plant the Indian flag on Indian soil, a
hugely symbolic act. But Bose’s strategy wasn’t just military. He knew the value of optics and
morale. His fiery speech, “Give me blood and I will give you freedom,” was designed to stir
Indians across the spectrum. He wanted Indians in the British Army to question their loyalty, and
ordinary people to believe that freedom could come through bold action.

Still, all wasn’t smooth sailing. Bose’s reliance on Japan was both strategic and risky. As Sumit
Sarkar notes, while Bose insisted that India’s freedom must be led by Indians, the Japanese had
their own imperial goals. By late 1944, Japan’s military position was weakening, and the INA’s
ability to operate declined sharply. Yet, even in defeat, the INA left an indelible mark. It wasn’t
just about battles won or lost—it was about challenging the image of British invincibility. Indian
soldiers were now openly fighting the Raj, under an Indian flag, for an Indian cause. The
psychological impact was enormous.

Bose’s political thinking was unique. Unlike Gandhi’s moral absolutism, Bose believed in
practical solutions. "Who will have an open mind on the question of the method to be employed,"
he suggested—what mattered was achieving purna swaraj, or full independence. He wasn’t rigid
in his ideology. From socialism, he borrowed the idea of economic equality and planned
development. From fascism, he admired efficiency and discipline (not its violence or racism).
From Indian traditions, he drew spiritual and cultural pride. His vision of samyavada—or
synthesis—sought a middle path between Western capitalism and Soviet communism. Bose
imagined an India that was industrialized, just, and proudly plural.

Religious harmony was central to his vision. The INA was consciously secular, with Hindus,
Muslims, Sikhs, and Christians serving together under one banner. At a time when communal
tensions in India were rising fast, Bose’s secular nationalism offered a powerful counter-narrative.
Bose also saw India’s freedom struggle as part of a global anti-colonial movement. His radio
broadcasts, often addressed to international audiences, framed the Indian cause in global terms—
linking it to broader fights against empire and oppression.

The INA’s direct military impact may have been limited, but its political ripple effect was huge.
After the war, captured INA officers Shah Nawaz Khan, Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon, and Prem Sahgal
were put on trial for treason at the Red Fort in Delhi. These trials quickly turned into a national
spectacle. As Bipan Chandra recounts, the public outcry was massive. Congress and Muslim
League leaders united in support of the accused. Even Nehru, famously non-violent, wore his
lawyer’s robes to defend them.

More quietly, the INA trials sent shockwaves through the British establishment. Reports of pro-
INA sentiment within the Indian Army unnerved colonial officials. The naval mutiny of 1946,
though not directly linked to the INA, reflected the spirit Bose had helped spark—one of open
defiance within the military ranks. Even the Congress leadership had to take note. Bose’s
popularity and the public’s admiration for the INA forced them to toughen their stance in
negotiations. His revolutionary appeal became a bargaining chip—implying that if moderate
voices weren’t heard, radical ones would rise. Stephen Cohen also points out that Bose's example
inspired confidence in India’s own defense potential. If a makeshift army of ex-prisoners could
challenge the British, maybe post-independence India didn’t need to rely so heavily on colonial
structures after all.

Subhas Chandra Bose remains one of India’s most complex and compelling freedom fighters.
Through the INA, he showed that Indian nationalism could take forms beyond non-violence—
forms grounded in action, sacrifice, and bold leadership. Though his military ambitions were
thwarted, the political momentum he generated accelerated India’s march toward freedom. His
legacy is often shrouded in mystery, especially around his reported death in a plane crash in 1945.
Conspiracy theories and alternate versions have kept his memory alive in varied and sometimes
contradictory ways. But beyond the myths, Bose’s enduring relevance lies in his ideas—his call
for national unity, his insistence on full sovereignty, and his commitment to justice and equality.
In today’s India, as we continue to shape our identity and role in the world, Bose’s vision still
offers valuable insights. Whether admired as a hero or critiqued as an idealist, Subhas Chandra
Bose remains a vital figure in understanding the full tapestry of India’s journey to independence.
References

• Bandyopadhyay, S. (2004). From Plassey to Partition: A History of Modern India.