CIA TRACKS SUBHAS BOSE TILL 1964

The 56 years that Subhas Chandra Bose has been 'dead' have outnumbered his official 'living' years.

And just before you think it is about time the nation got over it, here's something that just won't let Bose's 'death' on August 18, 1945 sink in.

Declassified documents show that even in 1964, at the level of US Secretary of State, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had reservations about Subhas Bose's death and was mulling over the possibility that Bose might return to his homeland.

The CIA had not been talking of some sort of a resurrection. It simply never believed that Bose died in Taiwan.

In its incarnation as Office of Strategic Service (OSS), it had been keeping a close watch on Bose's daring moves after his great escape from Calcutta in 1941.

A memorandum to the State Department on July 1946, almost a year after Bose's 'death', states that "a search of our files indicates that there is no information available regarding subject's (Bose's) death that would shed any light on the reliability of the reports mentioned in the reference inquiry to the State Department".

Earlier, in May 1946, an airgram to the Secretary of State dwelt on the impact of Subhas Bose's return to India. The agent, whose name has been blacked out along with other vital details, writes that someone approached him "several days ago on the question of Subhas Chandra Bose. ... (censored) ... said that the hold which Bose had over the Indian imagination was tremendous and that if he should return to the country trouble would result which in his judgement would be extremely difficult to quell."

"According to ... (censored) ... it should be reasonably easy to establish beyond the shadow of a doubt whether Bose is dead or alive."

Originating in Bombay, the airgram was received in Washington D C on June 3, 1946, at 2.13 pm. It concludes saying: "If the (State) Department could furnish any information on this subject (Bose's death), it would be most helpful to this Consulate General ... (censored) ... positive proof of some kind that Bose is dead would be most interesting."

However, it is the documents of the 1964 vintage that are most astonishing. That the CIA should even discuss Subhas' 'return' in the 20th year of his 'death' is quite astonishing. Dated February 27, 1964 and heavily censored, this particular document just about manages to import the crux of the matter.

It is a memorandum for "Chief, ... (censored) ..." and the sender is Deputy Director of Security. The subject has been blacked out but Subhas Bose's name appears in ink. The document reads as follows:
1. Reference is made to your telephonic request of 19 February 1964 that the Subject be interviewed by a representative of this office.
2. Attached is the report of the interview conducted on 27 February 1964 at Washington D C. No further action will be taken in this matter unless requested by you.

The document carries the following attachments:

"At Washington D C :

On February 26, 1964 at approximately 1345 hours, ...(censored)...was interviewed...(censored)...? ...(censored)... relate a story concerning the possible return of one Subas (or Subhas) Chandra Bose. This individual is a former deposed president of the Indian National Congress, 1938-39, and is believed to have died in an airplane crash after the war. However, there now exists a strong possibility that BOSE is leading the religious group undermining the current Nehru Government."

"Subject desired that his story be presented to the proper persons in the agency for evaluation and to alert those concerned of the previously mentioned possibility. Subject also advised the [sic]...(censored)... was a former member of the British Counter Intelligence Corps and could provide some factual information regarding BOSE and his operations with the Indian National Army during World War II.

"SUBJECT was dressed neatly in a designer suit and his conversation were intelligent. He did not appear to be alarmed or emotional about his story and was merely offering it as a guide to the Central Intelligence Agency for whatever action they deemed advisable".

The ideological development that Bose sought has never materialised...

Like Turkey's Kemal Ataturk - a man he admired - Bose might well have produced a nation at once new, yet full of old virtues. This is best illustrated in his approach to women: he was not one for making strident feminist statements but, even on that submarine bringing him from Germany to Japan, he was busily telling Abid Hasan of the need to get Indian women to join the I.N.A., and how they would have to abandon their beloved sarees in order to do so. In south Asia he did get many immigrant women to join the I.N.A. - demonstrating that Indian feminism could be happily blended with the exigency of war.
The ideological development that Bose sought has never materialised. Like all national-liberation movements, the independent Congress was a coalition: of business seeking to oust British capital, of rural kulaks confident that native rulers would do more for them than alien ones, of various interest groups and of socialists aware that the Congress was the only party capable of furthering their ideas. Gandhi did suggest that the Congress should disband after independence, but this was clearly impossible: self-interest, if nothing else, ruled it out. Today almost all the major political groups in India- communists, socialists, free-enterprise capitalists, Gandhian socialists - trace their ancestry to the Congress: only the right-wing Hindu Jan Sangh can claim a different parentage.
Though he bravely maintained his independence from both the Germans and the Japanese - no mean feat - he deliberately avoided the wider implications of their awful philosophies. However, his argument that foreign help was required in order to drive the British out was justified by the events of 1945-6, and has been the bedrock of nearly all successful national-liberation movements since the. In this, at least, Bose was probably far ahead of his time. In our age, when a national-liberation movement's accepting foreign help from all and sundry is a common fact of life, the idea may seem of no great significance. In the early forties, for a subject non-white race even to think of any such thing was revolutionary indeed.
....'It is our duty,' Bose told his I.N.A., 'to pay for our liberty with our own blood. The freedom that we shall win through our sacrifice and exertions, we shall be able to preserve with our own strength.' ....."

Had Bose returned to India....

Had Bose returned to India after the war he might well have prevented the tragedy. He was not a tired politician ready to accept office under any terms. Although his uncompromising hostility to Jinnah and Pakistan might have led to a civil war, the cost of that could not have been greater than the senseless waste of partition.

Certainly Bose's often repeated warning that the Congress would pay dearly for the acceptance of 'office mentality' was historically acute. It came when in the late thirties the Congress was struggling to cope with the consequences of the 1935 Government of India Act, and the blandishments it offered. In the 1936 elections, the Congress reaped the rewards of nearly two decades of unceasing mass struggle against the British and totally vanquished the Muslim League.

But by 1945, after a decade of negotiations and some power-sharing with the British, the Congress was reduced to the level of the Muslim League; just another group, albeit powerful, seeking the rewards of office. And by placing such faith in the negotiating chamber the Congress had played into the hands of Jinnah, the master lawyer and negotiator. As Bose had foreseen, the Congress had thrown away the trump card of its power - mass struggle - for the dubious delights of the round table.

But could Indians have lived with Bose? An extreme man, he produced extreme reactions: total adulation or permanent rejection. Certainly the India of Bose would have been very different from the India of Nehru. Bose had often said that India needed at least twenty years of iron dictatorial rule, and he would most certainly have rejected the type of parliamentary democracy that has developed. This opens up the whole question of whether it is better for people to have food or to have freedom to change their political rulers every five years. The argument can never be resolved - though, given the recent adulation of the West for China, some of the oldest democracies in the world seem to think food is more important.

Surely Bose's rule would have degenerated into autocracy, like that of Mrs Gandhi between 1975 and 1977? Though the analogy is not quite accurate (Mrs Gandhi's rule degenerated long before the events of June 1975), for conclusive evidence Bose's critics point to his behaviour in Germany and with the Japanese during the war. In a climate that brooked no dissent and where the leader was always right, he too came to believe that he could do no wrong.

Part of the possible reason for this change of personality - if there was a change - may lie in the fact that at that stage, particularly in south-east Asia, he found himself a king without any worthwhile courtiers. The people who surrounded him there were political innocents, thrust into the wider world by events beyond their control: they could only applaud never interject. Bose was, as the official Japanese history puts it, 'a bright mornings star amidst them'. There is also evidence to suggest that Subhas Bose was not quite the dictator a simple reading of his speeches makes him out to be.

No doubt there was an authoritarian streak in him, but his actions often belied his dictatorial postures. in 1939, as Congress president, he behaved - against Gandhi's wishes - less like an autocrat and more like a negotiator who had won one round and expected to reap some benefit from it. Throughout his political career he was always loyal to colleagues even at the risk of damaging his own chances: hardly the mark of a man of iron.

Almost alone among Indian leaders, Bose offered solutions that were both visionary and practical. Nehru's socialism may have been more rounded; rigorously logical and free of Bose's celebrated eclecticism. But its strain of romanticism divorced it from the realities of India, and the Nehru years resulted, almost inevitably, in a country with the most progressive socialist legislation outside the Soviet bloc which happily allowed the most unbridled capitalism to grow and flourish on a feudal structure that had changed little, if at all, since the British days. The cynicism this produced has bitten so deep that every government since has had to struggle against it and no combination in Indian politics looks likely to counteract the years of wasted opportunities and lost hopes.

This may seem hard, given the undoubted economic progress India has made in the last thirty years. When the British left, India had little or no industrial capacity; now she is the tenth industrial power in the world, exporting machinery to the West and capable of producing her own nuclear weapons. But the rapid industrialisation has been uneven and ill-directed, with the beneficiaries limited to a small, if growing, sector of the country.

Bose had the capacity to inspire total love and dedication, and produce gold from dross. Many hated him, but those he 'touched' loved him with an almost overpowering sense of completeness. And this, combined with his rigorous, matter-of-fact manner and an instinctive feel for ancient Indian loyalties, might well have produced the revolution that India needed - and still lacks.

Netaji Subhas and the Mahatma" by Prafull Goradia, The Pioneer, Jan23, 2004

On Netaji Subhas's birth anniversary, it would be worthwhile to compare his role in the freedom struggle with that of Mahatma Gandhi. Their equation was essentially adversarial. British author Michael Brecher has criticised the practitioner of satyagraha for having pushed out the exponent of freedom by any means. To quote: Of all the participants only Gandhi had a clear and consistent object - to oust Bose. (Nehru: A Political Biography, page 245). Historian Michael Edwardes wrote that Gandhi, whom so many in India and abroad believed to be only sweetness and light, had by the use of his overwhelming prestige and the sort of intrigue one would expect from the Tammany Hall, succeeded in disposing of the only real opposition to his leadership. (The Last Years of British India, page 67).

Bose's radical agenda did not suit Gandhi who opposed him for seeking re-election as president of the Congress in 1939. Nevertheless, in the polls that followed, Gandhi's candidate, Dr Pattabhi Sitaramayya, was defeated. The Mahatma could not stomach his candidate's defeat. In his book, The Springing Tiger, historian Hugh Toye has written: Bose's popular mandate as president of the Congress in 1939 was denied by intrigue, intrigue not only against him but against the very democracy which had elected him.

There is no doubt that but for Gandhi the masses of India might not have become aware, for many more years, about the importance of independence.....

However, Gandhi's contribution in precipitating the British departure was very limited....Gandhi himself was not in any undue hurry....On the other hand, the impact of the Indian National Army, or the Azad Hind Fauj, founded and led by Bose, had a telling effect on the psyche of the British rulers....

Netaji Subhas's action thus hit the Achilles' heel of the foreign rulers. They took it as a clear message that it was time to pack their bags and go. So then, Gandhi awakened the Indian masses to the value of being free and stirred their souls to depend Independence. But it was Netaji Bose who precipitated the British departure. This achievement of the springing tiger has not enjoyed the highlight it deserves....

Thus, that it was the Mahatma's satyagraha/ahimsa that won us Independence can certainly be questioned as being a myth. It was Netaji's militancy and influence over the Indian civilian and military machinery and the Navy revolt in Mumbai in 1946 that really shook the British. Yet the myth of a mealy-mouthed non-violence is a myth zealously fostered by the Nehruvian dispensation. As Goradia continues, "Nehru made it his party's as well as Government's policy to underplay the legend of Netaji".

It wasn't just Gandhi and Nehru. "The communists had lampooned Netaji in the most unpalatable terms...during the freedom movement. Later, they acknowledged their `historical blunder'. On the last Netaji anniversary, Mr Bhattacharya asked historians to `give Netaji his proper due in the freedom movement of India"

The Mystery behind Netaji's Disappearance by Shamoli Mitra

For decades Indians all over the country have mulled and argued over a mystery that till today maintains its grip over the collective consciousness of the nation. The question that comes up again and again in the minds of Indians is this - Did Netaji really die in the 1945 plane crash? But shocking new developments over the past few months have propelled this question into ever more mysterious realms. Incredibly hard facts have now emerged from Moscow vaults that indicate what Indians had hoped for and suspected all along - that our beloved Netaji , Subhash Chandra Bose did NOT die in the 1945 plane crash as the Government of India appointed inquiry has claimed all along. Netaji was in fact very much alive till at least 1946 one full year after his supposed "death".

So what do these tumultuous revelations mean? The new findings are based on declassified documents in the Russian military archives in Paddolsk, and from the British archives. They were discovered by three researchers-Purabi Ray, Hari Vasudevan and Shobanlal Dutta Gupta-working on the history of communist movement in India.

The plot has thickened even deeper with the admission by these researchers that they have been receiving threatening calls from unidentified persons asking them to suspend all further inquiries and end the government-funded research. Fear for security led the work on the project to be stopped shortly, around the middle of this year. The researchers refused to speak to the press on the grounds that they would first have to depose their discoveries before the Mukherjee commission, the third inquiry panel appointed by the Indian government so far) before giving out any details.

What is clear however is that the Russian archives had yielded two precious documents. The first concerned a discussion that Joseph Stalin had with his defense minister Voroschilov and foreign affairs minister Molotov in 1946.

The second was a report filed by a Soviet field agent stationed in India, also in 1946.The first document quotes Stalin and others discussing plans for the communist movement in India and mentions the role of Bose. In addition records available from British archives (under the 'declassification after 30 years' rule) show that on August 17, 1945, (the plane crash was reported the next day), Bose had expressed a keen desire to reach Soviet Union to continue the struggle against the British. One more British archive document also states that the entire theory of the plane crash, in Taihuku (Japan), was pre-planned and contrived. In fact as late as December 20, 1945 , a Japanese newspaper even reported that Bose was on his way to the Soviet Union and passed through Tokyo.

Adding to the clouds of confusion are the details indicating that just a few days before Stalin and his colleagues discussed Bose, a Soviet agent named V G Sayadyants who was based in Mumbai reported home that "the Soviet Union cannot possibly work with either Nehru or Gandhi," and that the Communist movement in India "is in a disarray." He also concluded that "Bose is the only hope for Soviet Russia," in his report.

The two death reports-one from MI2 (a wing of British military intelligence) and the other from the British embassy in Japan served as the primary evidence of the story that Bose had died of severe burns in the plane crash. But both of these reports have been discovered to contain major discrepancies. While the British embassy report claimed to have clearly identified Bose's body, the MI2 report was "not sure."

On November 23, the Mukherjee Commission held a hearing where the researchers including Professor Purobi Roy were asked to submit a list of documents and with their respective translations before the Commission. But in a puzzling development the Commission disclosed that the Union Home Ministry by an affidavit claimed privilege under the Sections 123 and 124 of the Evidence Act and Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India on the files. Justice Manoj K. Mukherjee told reporters that "The files on the urn allegedly containing Netaji's ashes in Renkoji Temple and the Union Government's decision to award Bose the Bharat Ratna, could not be given to the Commission on grounds that making them public would be a threat to the nation's security!".

Justice Mukherjee also made the surprising observation that "We will take up the issue during the next hearing if the Union Home Ministry can claim privilege on these files. I don't say they are not doing anything, but whatever they are doing is not adequate". When asked if this indicated an uncertain future for the Commission, Justice Mukherjee shot back saying: ''It's not for me to pass comments." Earlier Justice Mukherjee had informed the audience that the Special Branch of the Calcutta Police had sent incorrect information regarding the files it was asked to submit.

A status report circulated among the audience said that the Prime Minister's Office sought 15 more days time to file a consolidated affidavit covering all the points mentioned in the proceedings of the Commission. The status report also noted that no affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Cabinet Secretariat, the National Archives of India, and Research and Analysis Wing. However, among other documents, the National Archives of India informed the Commission in a letter dated 24.10.2000 that they had received 46 xerox pages on Subhash Chandra Bose from the department of Culture, Government of India, though the Embassy of India in Moscow on 15 May1991.

One is forced to ask what is about the Netaji files that is causing the government to cite endangerment of the nation's security as an excuse to stop the documents from becoming public. Could the BJP government be feeling the heat to hide the details of what really happened to Netaj1? There is no doubt plenty of resistance from the Congress which does not want the nation to know Jawaharlal Nehru's actions and role in betraying Netaji.

The previous two Commissions that were supposed to unearth the details about Netaji were both appointed by the Congress government. These were the Shah Nawaz Committee or the Khosla Commission. The Government under Mrs. Gandhi told Khosla Commission that many confidential files of Nehru connected with the reports about Netaji were either missing or destroyed. These files were dealt with by the personal secretary of Pandit Nehru - Mohammad Yunus .

It had also been discovered that the British intelligence team informed their Government that Pandit Nehru had "received a secret communication from Bose". This report was confirmed by a witness, Shri Shyamlal Jain of Meerut, while he deposed before Khosla Commission. In 1945-46, Shri Jain was working as a confidential steno of Asaf Ali who was Secretary to the INA Defense Committee with Bhulabhai Desai as its Chairman and Pandit Nehru as one of its prominent members. This confidential steno of the INA Defense Committee, in the course of his deposition, made a shocking revelation about Nehru's attitude toward Netaji.

Shri Jain had told the Khosla Commission:

"I solemnly affirm and state on oath that one evening (the date may be Dec. 26 or 27, 1945) I was called by Shri Jawaharlal Nehru on telephone to come to the residence of Shri Asaf Ali with a typewriter as he had a lot of work to be typed by me, which I complied. After getting some papers typed by me, Shri Jawaharlal Nehru drew out a paper from the pocket of his achkan and asked me to make four copies of it for him. The said paper was a hand-written matter and was somewhat difficult to read. Now, what was written on that paper, I am trying to reproduce from my memory:"

"Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose proceeding by aeroplane from Saigon arrived today, August 23, 1945 at Dairen (Manchuria) at 1:30 afternoon. The said plane was a Japanese bomber plane. It was full of gold in the shape of bars, ornaments and jewelry. Netaji carried two attache cases, one in each hand. On alighting from the plane, Netaji took tea with bananas. When Netaji finished tea, he along with four others, out of which one was a Japanese named General Shidei (and others have lapsed from memory), took their seats in a jeep standing nearby. The said jeep proceeded toward Russian territory. After about 3 hours the said jeep returned and informed the pilot of the plane who flew back to Tokyo."

"After handing over the said paper to me for typing, Shri Jawaharlal Nehru went to Mr. Asaf Ali and remained busy in conversation with him for 10 or 15 minutes...I could not complete the work, because the name of the writer on that letter was not readable, and I kept waiting for Shri Jawaharlal to come and tell me the name. In the meantime, I went through the letter several times and that is all that I could remember to the present day. Shri Jawaharlal could not discern the name of the writer and asked me to pull out the papers and hand them over as they were."I solemnly affirm and state on oath that thereafter Shri Jawaharlal Nehru gave me four papers from his writing pad to make four copies of a letter, which he would dictate to me on typewriter, which I also complied. The contents of the letter, as far as I could remember, were as follows:

Dear Mr. Attlee:

I understand from a reliable source that Subhas Chandra Bose, your war criminal, has been allowed to enter Russian territory by Stalin. This is a clear treachery and betrayal of faith by the Russians. As Russia has been an ally of the British-Americans, it should not have been done. Please take note of it and do what you consider proper and fit.

Yours sincerely,
Jawaharlal Nehru.

When these shocking revelations were revealed by MP Samar Guha, they were met with incredulity and anger and Mr. Guha had been lambasted as a hysterical conspiracy theorist who was on a witch hunt against the Gandhi family. But now we see that subsequent discoveries have buttressed Mr. Guha's accusations and point to the shocking role of Pandit Nehru in this sordid mess. Below are some of the hard-hitting revelations by Mr. Guha which are now clearly augmented by documentary evidence.

1)British Intelligence affirmed that Pandit Nehru received a secret communication from Netaji and Jain confirmed it further without knowing anything about this secret report.

2)Col. Tada, one of the principal architects of Netaji's escape plan confided to S.A. Iyer in 1951 that the Japanese agreed to make necessary arrangements to convey Netaji to Russian territory across the border of Manchuria.

3)Neither the Government Counsel appearing before the Inquiry Commission, nor Mr. Khosla either challenged or refuted the veracity of Jain's testimony.

4)Most of the secret files about Netaji, that were maintained by Pandit Nehru himself as "P.M.'s special" files, one of which included all communications connected with INA Defense Committee, were reported by the Government as "either missing or destroyed". It will not be easy to presume that Netaji's communication to Nehru and a copy of Nehru's letter to Attlee have also been destroyed.

5)Late Amritlal Seth, former editor of the Gujarati Daily Janmabhumi, who accompanied Nehru during his visit to Singapore told late Sarat Chandra Bose immediately after his return from Singapore that Panditji was warned by the British Admiral that, according to his report, 'Bose' did not die in the alleged air crash and if Nehru played up too high with the legends of Bose and demands for re-absorption of the INA in the Indian Army, he would be taking the risk of presenting India on a platter to Bose when he reappeared.

The report by Amritlal Seth is corroborated by two facts. On arrival at Singapore Pandit Nehru was given a rousing reception by the INA there, when Panditji agreed to their request to place a wreath on the INA Martyr Monument, which was demolished under orders from Mountbatten immediately after British re-occupation of Singapore.

Strangely, next day, Nehru refused to attend the INA Martyr Memorial ceremony organized at Singapore. About three decades later, Mountbatten boastfully stated in the 'Nehru Oration' speech that Nehru acted very compliantly on his advice regarding the treatment about the INA. After his return from Singapore, Nehru never uttered a word about Netaji for over a decade even after he became the Prime Minister of India.

6)Till the 1950's, AIR was instructed not to cover any special talk on Netaji or broadcast any news about Netaji's birthday, exceeding a few minutes. All army barracks were prohibited from displaying any portrait of Netaji and this ban-order continued for years even after withdrawal of the British Power.

7)After coming to power, Pandit Nehru had received all the secret British reports which informed the Wavell Government that Bose reached Russia, but as Prime Minister of India he never inquired publicly about these reports from the Russian Government. Even more suspicious is the fact that Pandit Nehru consistently opposed any demands for full-fledged judicial inquiry about the Netaji mystery and appointed the Shah Nawaz Committee primarily as a smokescreen to scuttle the move for a non-official inquiry about Netaji under the chairmanship of Dr. Radha Benode Pal.

This incredible and shocking conspiracy to hide the circumstances and conditions surrounding Netaji's disappearance and the subsequent falsified rumour of his death are of significant importance to the Indian people. The annals of Indian history and the conscience of the nation demands that the facts concerning this mystery be revealed to the public. The BJP government must show the courage and fortitude to overcome political compulsions and point the finger at the real culprits. Only then can the ghost of lost opportunities and the regret of having lost their most beloved leader too soon, be put to rest in the minds of the Indian people.

The Joint Petition to the Prime Minister

Dear fellow Indian

You are requested to show your solidarity with an effort to aid the inquiry into the fate of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. Kindly consider the following with an open mind:

It has been 60 years since Netaji was reported killed following an air crash in Taipei, Taiwan. Since then, a torturous debate has been gnawing at the conscience of grateful Indians. Intelligence records show that under the ruse of a faked air crash, Netaji may have escaped to the then Soviet Union. And that this may have been known to top Indian leaders of that era. You would have heard many fanciful as well as dreadful stories. It has been alleged that Netaji died in a hideous Siberian camp in the 1950s. God forbid that should be true. The truth, whatever it is, must be found out.

Now it has come to the crunch. In a few months from now, the report of the Honourable Justice MK Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry will be out. Set up after a Court order, this Commission has, against all odds, found out from the Taiwan Government that there is no evidence of the alleged air crash in Taipei, Netaji's death and the cremation of either his body or of those who are said to have died following the said crash on August 18, 1945.

On the basis of further evidence they have unearthed, the Commission has asked the Government of India to arrange for their visit to Russia from 20th July 2005. However, the Commission cannot conduct proper inquires in Russia without the full backing of the Indian Government, which for unknown reasons, has been hostile towards all attempts to ascertain facts about Netaji's fate. The Commission intends to examine some Russian witnesses and also sift through intelligence and security related records concerning Netaji. Full access to such records cannot be given to the Commission unless a formal request to that effect is made by the Government of India to their Russian counterpart. The key to resolving the Netaji mystery lies with our own Government.

Considering the fact that the mystery is 60 years old and many contemporaries and witnesses have since passed away, this could well be the last chance to get to the bottom of the matter. History will not forgive our generation if we squander this golden opportunity to investigate the fate of a sterling patriot, who crisscrossed the globe like a colossus during the Second World War, so that we can breathe the air of a free India today.

It is therefore most urgent that Dr Manmohan Singh, the Honourable Prime Minister of India, publicly requests His Excellency Vladimir Putin, the Honourable President of Russia, to make known his Government's knowledge whether or not Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose was alive after 18 August 1945.

If you support the demand that our Prime Minister should take this step in national interest, then please forward this mail to as many people as possible. You may also want to sign an online petition.

Jai Hind
(Issued in public interest by journalist and author Anuj Dhar in association with other members of the Yahoo group on Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.)

Why the Petition

We all know that JL Nehru, Shah Nawaz Khan, GD Khosla has been advocating the fact that Netaji died in a plane crash in Taipei on 18 August 1945 and that his ashes were lying in Renkoji temple. And time and again the Indian Prime Ministers have been visiting the Renkoji temple to pay their respects. The marathon debate on the Lok Sabha on the 28th of August'1978 culminated with the then Prime Minister Morarji Desai's rejection of both the reports, he said "The Shah Nawaz Committee and the Khosla Commission held the report of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's death following a plane crash as true. Since then, reasonable doubts have been cast on the correctness in the two reports and the various important contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses have been noticed. Some further contemporary official documentary records have also been available. In the light of those doubts and contradictions and those records, the govt. finds it difficult to accept that the earlier conclusions are decisive."

So we know that there is no evidence of any plane carrying Netaji crashing in or around Taipei on or around August 1945. ( In an email written to to Anuj Dhar in 2003, the writer of Back from Dead ,the Mayor of Taipei Dr.Ying Jo Ma wrote "According to the historical documents in Taipei city archives, there is no such record of a plane crash in Taipei on that day." and according to the MOTC (Ministry of Transportation and Communication) Minister, Lin Ling-San " A thorough analysis of the records left by the Japanese showed that there had been only one major crash during that period. An American C-47 transportercarrying about 26 released POWs had crashed near Mount Trident in taitung area around 200 nautical miles away form Taipai, that was in September 1945. There was no evidence to show that any plane carrying Netaji had ever crashed in or around Taipei between 14th August and 25th October of 1945" ).

Still as per a note in a "Top Secret" PM Secretariat (PMO of Nehru days) file, which was sent to the Mukherjee Commission by mistake, "the ashes and other remains" of Netaji were received in India in 1954 and why people of India, the inquiry panels and Netaji family were not told of this?

Also , since the fall of the Soviet Russia, the Russians themselves have been saying that Netaji was in Russia after his "death". The Commission wants to visit Russia to verify facts.

Any guesses why the Government wouldn't allow Mukherjee Commission to visit Russia? They were also opposed to his visiting Taiwan as well! And, why is that no DNA test could be carried on the Renkoji ashes despite Justice Mukherjee's asking for it years?

PREFACE From 'The Freedom Struggle and the Dravidian Movement' by P.Ramamurti, Orient Longman, 1987 on the Transfer of Power from Britain to India -

We have seen that no non-violent struggle conducted by Mahatma Gandhi in the course of the freedom struggle had achieved its objective. In 1921, the non-cooperation movement was withdrawn before it was started. In 1930 the Civil Disobedience Movement was withdrawn without achieving its limited objective. (In 1932, the Civil Disobedience Movement was suspended at Gandhiji's instance and was never revived.) In 1941 individual satyagraha for the right of freedom of speech ended in six months without achieving its aim. Gandhiji never started the 1942 countrywide struggle for freedom.

How is it then that the British Government transferred power to the Congress and Muslim League leaders in 1947?
For an answer to this question, one must look into the countrywide upsurge in which military personnel also participated en masse, as anticipated by the communists at the end of the war.
First, there was the trial of the Indian National Army. Consequent to the surrender of Japan, the Government arrested the sepoys of the Indian National Army and started a trial on charges of attempting to overthrow the Government established by Law in the Red Fort at New Delhi.
The Communist Party of India gave a call for countrywide hartals and strikes. The call was responded to in cities, towns and in big villages. In Calcutta the hartals and strikes lasted a week and the people took to the streets demanding the unconditional release of the I.N.A. prisoners. The Government was forced to release them unconditionally.

When Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru set foot in Jammu and Kashmir, the Princely Raj arrested him. Immediately the Communist Party called for countrywide protest demonstrations. The Kashmir Government was forced to release him.

Next came the strikes of police personnel in many provinces, supported by the Communist Party. This was followed by strikes in military cantonments all over the country. The Indian soldiers and air force personnel left the barracks, and held massive rallies in nearby towns shouting slogans like `Down with British Government' `Down with 'Imperialism' and `Inquilab Zindabad'.

From Kashmir to Travancore, the people of the princely states were fighting to end princely rule. The crowning event of these struggles was the strike by the navy men of the naval ship `Talwar' stationed near Bombay on 19th February 1946. The British Union Jack was removed and in its place the Congress-League and Communist Party's flags fluttered proudly.

The naval ship `Hindustan' was ordered to proceed to Bombay to quell the revolt. On reaching Bombay, the navy men of `Hindustan' refused to fire on their brothers. Then Admiral Godfrey through a radio broadcast ordered the navy men of `Talwar' and `Hindustan' to surrender within 24 hours, failing which, he said, `The entire might of the British Royal Navy would be used to crush the revolt; it does not matter if the entire Indian navy is destroyed in the process.'
Sardar Patel, on behalf of the Congress, supported Admiral Godfrey and said, `Discipline in the Navy is of utmost importance and the men should obey the orders of the officers with¬out questioning.'
The fighting navy men had formed a struggle committee, which appealed to the Congress, Muslim League and the Communist Party to lend their support. The Communist Party appealed to the people all over the country to demonstrate in support of the struggle; demonstrations and strikes took place all over the country. In Karachi, Cochin, Madras, Calcutta and Chittagong, there was complete strike in all-naval establishments.

Sardar Patel, on behalf of the Congress, issued an order to the working class of Bombay not to respond to the call of the Communist Party. The people ignored Sardar Patel's call, struck work, observed hartal, demonstrated with the tri-colour flags of the Congress, the green flag of the Muslim League and the red flag of the Communist Party shouting slogans like `Hindus and Muslims Unite; down, down the British Government', `Down with imperialism', `Inquilab Zindabad', etc.

Sardar Patel lamented in a statement that the Congress prestige was sinking. Troops manned by British soldiers were sent to Bombay to quell the demonstrators. They started shooting at unarmed demonstrators indiscriminately. Yet the demonstrations lasted for many days. The official statement of the Central Legislature was that 130 people were killed, which was a conservative estimate. No one knows how many died and howmany were wounded since most of the people were not taken to hospitals.
Gandhiji, who was quiet during the struggle, later issued a statement:
'I can understand if there was unity from top to bottom in this struggle. Only the people at the lower levels were united. This will only lead the country into the hands of the rabble; I would prefer to die in the fire than to live for hundred and twenty five years.'

Four days after the naval revolt started, on the night of the 23rd February 1946, the British Cabinet held an emergency meeting and decided to transfer political power to the Congress and League leaders.

The British Prime Minister Attlee announced the decision the next day in the House of Commons. The former Prime Minister Churchill and his conservative colleagues bitterly opposed the decision. While replying to the debate, Prime Minister Attlee said:

"In the conditions prevailing in India today, old remedies are of no use. It is meaningless to talk about them now. The heat in 1946 is not the same as that of 1920 (non-cooperation movement), 1930 (first civil disobedience movement) or 1942 (when the Quit India resolution was passed). Nothing intensifies the national feelings and aspirations of a colonial people like a great war. Those who have had anything to do with the two wars, know what effect the 1914-18 a world war had on the feelings and aspirations of the Indian people. National waves which rise slowly or are accelerated during wartime and rise very high after the war. During the war, they are controlled to some extent; but after the war, they break all shackles and rise very high. Today, in India, no, in the whole Asian continent, they are dashing against the stones and, rocks, breaking them to pieces. I have no doubt about it. India alone has to decide what its future will be and what its status will be in the world. I hope that India will decide to stay in the Commonwealth. Instead, if it decides to be an independent country, it is our duty to work for peaceful transfer of power in the interim period and make it easy. India has a right to have a sovereign independent country."

Sir Stafford Cripps, intervening in the debate made the position crystal clear. He said:
"...The Indian Army in India is not obeying the British officers. We have recruited our workers for the war; they have been demobilised after the war. They are required to repair the factories damaged by Hitler's bombers. Moreover, they want to join their kith and kin after five and a half years of separation. Their kith and kin also want to join them. In these conditions if we have to rule India for a long time, we have to keep a permanent British army for a long time in a vast country of four hundred millions. We have no such army...."

The countrywide opposition to British rule in which the Indian personnel of the three armies participated, crowned by the naval mutiny, was the direct cause of the decision to transfer power.

The Congress had nothing to do with the entire upsurge. Congressmen obscure these facts today. Subsequently, a cabinet mission arrived in India and held talks with both Congress and League leaders. It used the differences between the Congress and the Muslims; Lord Wavel was replaced as Viceroy by Lord Mountbatten, and an interim Government dominated by the Congress and the League was formed. Riots were engineered between Hindus and Sikhs on the one hand, and Hindus and Muslims on the other. On August 15th, United India was divided into India and Pakistan, and power was transferred to the Congress in India, and the League in Pakistan. India and Pakistan attained independence in the midst of the worst instance in history of mutual killing by two communities."