Bose was a nationalist who fought the British to gain independence for India. Based on strong nationalism and progressive outlook described in this book, it is not hard to understand why he is so respected and loved by Indians to this day. But the controversy that would always stay with him is his relationship with the Axis powers and in particular, his collaboration with the Japanese in the Second World War. In the end the Axis lost, and it became hard to place this man.
The author probably knew the challenge she faced. On one hand she obviously, like many other Indians, have tremendous admiration for Bose and would love to write glowingly about him. But on the other hand she has to square the fact that he was indeed on the side of the Axis. The atrocities perpetrated by the Japanese during the war are well documented and Bose risked being guilty by association. The author tried feebly and unconvincingly to tell her readers that Bose was not like Japanese, in fact, he was sympathetic to the fate of the China (pg. 70, 131). All to no avail. Bose himself was clear as to who his enemies were - the British, and anyone against the British was his friend (pg. 131). In addition, Bose was invited to attend the Greater East Asian Conference, as were other nationalists who sought support front he Japanese, including Wang Jingwei (汪精卫), considered by the Chinese as a traitor. Redeeming Bose in the eyes of those against he Japanese would not be easy.
It might have been better for the author to dispense with this effort altogether and portray Bose for who he was - a nationalist whose preoccupation was to free India from Great Britain, gain independence for India and let the people determine their own fate, a very noble cause. While it may be hard to conceive now, what was happening then in China was not India’s or Bose's problem. His priority was his country and people. That, at least to me, is a very acceptable position. To try to forcibly put him in a different light was vain and in the end, unsuccessful.
What about his legacy in Southeast Asia? The author made a somewhat tenuous link between Bose and what happened in Southeast Asia after the war, namely, the rise of nationalism, the increase in activism, and the fight for independence from their colonisers. To what extent one can attribute this to Bose is arguable. Many surely looked up to him, but his role in sparking or sustaining their fight is hard to gauge. In fact, Indians' political roles in the countries of Southeast Asia would be small, perhaps with the exception of Singapore.
There is one other aspect of his legacy that the author did not explore - the race relations in Southeast Asia after the war. Unfortunately Bose died an untimely death and we can only guess the impact he had made. Much was made of Bose's speech at Cathay and Padang in Singapore in 1943. His appearance in Padang was accompanied by a review of the INA. With Sook Ching barely a year prior to it, I cannot help wondering how the Chinese perceive such a parade of Indian forces under the auspice of the Japanese, especially when many amongst the INA were originally with the British Indian Army.
Subhas Chandra Bose led a colourful albeit short life. He lived for a cause which gave him the opportunity to meet many important people and to travel to many places. He was revered by the Indian diaspora in Southeast Asia and it is here that the book is situated. I have argued that the author's depiction of Bose is incomplete yet she wrote an engaging and interesting book. It was an honest effort and much credit must go to the hard-work that she put into the research. This is only the first book on Bose that I have read but it has already piqued my interest in the man and I will certainly try to learn more about him. This book is recommended for those who are interested to learn about Bose’s days in Southeast Asia.
(Find this book at Goodreads)
